I'm going to come with them.

I wouldn't have to talk about it.

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

All council meetings will be live streamed on the city's website.

And for guest speakers, please do not turn off your microphones.

Our first order of business is roll call.

Will the clerk please take the roll?

Mr.

Charland.

Mr.

Cockhill.

Miss Giros.

Mr.

LeBelle.

Here.

Mr.

Mosley.

Miss Salonetra.

Here.

Miss Warwick.

Mr.

Wilson.

Ms.

Strasper Chair.

Here.

Five members present.

Thank you.

Our next order of business is to amend the agenda.

Can I have a motion to amend?

So moved.

Second.

All in favor?

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 uh comments are minute limited to matters of concern, official action, or deliberation, which are or maybe before city council for vanity will not be permitted.

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

Yes, we can.

Uh in um in order to either avoid conflict with other traffic or to protect the safety of any person or vehicle.

Following this claim to its conclusion, a driver is exempt from following the law by simply claiming that they are protecting the safety of their vehicle.

This means that a driver could make this claim to get away with parking in front of fire hydrants on train tracks, within 20 feet of the driveway entrance to a fire station, within an intersection on crosswalk, on bridges, in tunnels, at any place signed note parking, in bike lanes, in front of bus stops, and on sidewalks in addition to other areas.

This is a dangerous loophole in the city's laws, and closing it with a simple change is common sense.

There's already a provision for emergency, so the drivers won't get a ticket if the car breaks down where parking is prohibited.

One of the most concerning effects of this loophole is that the police are reluctant to get tickets for sidewalk parking violations, as they can easily be overturned by the time they get to the magistrate based on this line of code.

Without this enforcement, Pittsburgh drivers have come to believe it is acceptable to park on sidewalks across the city, which forces pedestrians to walk in the street where they are much more likely to be struck and severely injured or killed by a driver.

Furthermore, sidewalks are not meant to hold the weight of cars and quickly degrade, leading to more dangerous obstacles for pedestrians, and especially our neighbors with disabilities who rely on safe, accessible sidewalks to get to doctor's appointments, grocery stores, and local businesses.

We are asking you to make a common sense change that would close this dangerous parking loophole by searching the words or vehicle from the law.

We must not put the safety of vehicles above the safety of people.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Zoe Abenzah Bridges.

Thank you.

My name is Dylan Bisescu.

I live on the south side of Pittsburgh.

I've kept my comments on the weekend lockdown on the South Side largely impersonal because this isn't just about me.

It's about this community and this city.

But like I just said at the top, I also live here.

So yes, it's also personal for me.

I want to tell you about some of the businesses this is hurting.

Businesses I used to enjoy on the weekend on the South Side that are no longer available without intolerable harassment.

Dolce Takeria near 13th Street serves tacos and drinks to late-night crowds that don't require alcohol, and it does it consistently above par.

I love the Carnegolina there.

It's rich, it's refreshing, and a little hot, just the way you want on a summer night.

And I wish I could take any of you there sometime when private, unaccountable strangers were not haranguing you for walking down the street.

If you haven't gone, try it.

They need the support when a street lockdown has locked out their customers.

Finn McCool's near 15th Street was the first place I went for a drink when I moved to Pittsburgh.

It was the winter time, it was cold and windy, and they welcomed me in.

I got to meet the fine people of my new home, and I'll never forget the student there who asked me about my work, connected with me on LinkedIn, and talked about his interest in pursuing the law like I have.

That's a model of the kind of person we should be able to see thriving here, learning here, enjoying life here, unmolested by a presumption of suspicion born of fear.

Now I mentioned intolerable harassment up at the top, and that deserves some details.

I am surprised, not a woman, but women in my life have told me that the security for this lockdown have subjected young women to pat downs, groping, and a blatant disregard for trauma and humiliation faced by people who have been victims of sexual violence.

Having their bodies touched without their consent by strangers when they have done absolutely nothing wrong is intolerable.

There is a reason I called this lockdown disgusting weeks ago, and there's a reason I told you not to pretend you didn't know.

Because these sorts of injustices are inevitable with the policies you have allowed here, and now you know, and it is still still up to you what you will do about it.

And I can only end with the same refrain because you always can and you always should end this lockdown now.

Thank you.

That exhaust our registered speakers.

We will now take comments from those in the audience wishing to speak.

Good morning.

My name is Yvonne F.

Brown.

I live at 715 Merchant Street.

That's in the Hill District, but it's up on Befford, the senior citizen home with 19 apartments.

And that the building is called K Lee or Tires.

Now, usually every time I come, I'm usually coming with complaints.

But today, I wanted to say something that I think it should be said.

Said so that everyone will know the type of services that we receive.

And I wanted to say to our head clerk.

And I talked with Dr.

Miller too.

And he's talking to me, and what we both come to realize is that she is out of sight.

She is professional and she does respond to the citizens.

And that's the only thing we're asking you to do as council people.

You're getting paid quite a bit.

You could at least respond when we talk to you, even in city council, even in in this hall when I'm talking to you now.

You could at least respond.

You respond when you think I'm saying something that you don't want the people to hear.

But citizens, I have been coming down all these years, and there's a lot of times I'm coming down with complaints.

But let me today, I feel it's on my heart that I need to tell you as citizens who watch this program, and also you city employees, city employees that have stopped me and said that they agree with some of the things that I'm saying.

They agree that you treat us citizens in our hall.

This is this is town hall town.

Do you understand what town means?

Everybody should be able to come in here and speak to you, and you should be listening.

We should all be at the table.

I don't like to be back there because we're back there, and here comes the cook councilwoman, run back and talk to them while we're talking.

Come on, give us some respect.

Please.

And I thank all of you city workers, and everyone has stopped me and said, Miss Brown, keep coming.

Or Miss Brown, I understand.

Do you understand?

It's hard.

It's hard, and I'm getting uh sort of tired.

And Dr.

Mill said, don't ever say that, but I am.

My daughter's been coming, and she may keep on, she couldn't make it today.

She's gonna keep on coming.

I might stop soon, because I am really tired.

But before I stop, I want to say to every one of you that has said, fight for your son.

I want to say thank you.

And all the times I've been coming, I'll be saying about how he was in pain.

And I felt it.

But I realized God sent me his pain.

He wasn't in pain when he died.

So all these years that I've been coming down here, at least that has given me some kind of thankfulness.

He wasn't suffering when he died.

Thank you.

Have a nice day.

Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Good morning, Special Agent Sunshine, the missing child Cerese Taylor.

Thank you, Lord, for your wisdom, knowledge, and understanding to endure this trial and the strength and courage to finish the race in Jesus' name.

Amen.

The title of my message is Stay Strong.

That's what he screamed to me this morning, Stay Strong.

Sometimes it's hard when you're being gang stalked, when your communication is being blocked, when you don't have a phone and you can't communicate with anybody because you're being blocked by the city you live in.

Because of the identity theft fraud investigation that they're part of.

Because of all of the fraud connected to my case of being homeless that you guys are a part of.

It's amazing.

Proverbs 2519.

It says, like a bad tooth or a lame foot is reliance on the unfaithful in times of trouble.

You guys aren't faithful.

There's too many people coming in here who are not happy with the communities that they live in that you guys are supposed to help them live in.

They're suffering.

We're struggling out here.

I sleep on concrete.

How?

Because I had two houses I was born with.

You stole them, sold them, and guess somebody's selling drugs about them.

And you think the FBI ain't coming?

Yes, they are.

With course in Jesus' name.

Proverbs 255.

It says, remove the wicked from the king's presence.

And his throne will be a sadness through righteousness, not wickedness.

That ain't what it said.

Yo Bravo wickedness.

Y'all practice voodoo.

Y'all rob Grays and cut out body parts for death rituals.

Have mercy.

Like for real.

Proverbs 1616 says of what use is money in the hand of a pole.

None.

None.

What's out there with the money?

Like really.

I tell you.

Come out here on the street.

Leave this meeting.

Go to your accounts.

Peg out 10% within there.

And get people off the street.

I guarantee.

None of y'all did it.

That was over a year ago.

Do you know how many more people are on the street now?

And I'm still out here.

But looking up.

Yeah, it's Billy.

I feel good for how you're using me.

I'm so grateful.

Today's joke has to do with this address.

Hey, Mr.

Obama, how you doing?

It came from the Washington DC marketplace.

Imagine that.

But it was in a closed closet.

At a place where I eat.

In Jesus' name.

Thank you, Lord, for using me as a vessel.

To do your will.

Not mine.

Amen.

Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

There are any further speakers.

Seeing none, we will move to our standing committee's agenda.

Our first committee is the Finance and Law Committee.

I'm sorry, actually, uh we are going to take it just slightly out of order.

Move down to the land use and economic development committee because we have a council member who has a another commitment and this this bill needs to move today.

So this is going to be Bill 518 under land use and economic development committee.

Bill five eighteen ordinance establishing an East Carson Street Improvement District for the area shown on Exhibit A at the behest of the East Carson Street Business District Advisory Committee.

Property owners and business owners to be benefited with specific improvements to be undertaken included, but not limited to financing of said improvements, method of assessing specific properties to be benefited, establishing a neighborhood improvement district management association to conduct administrative procedures for the neighborhood improvement district, providing for the establishment of a separate account for deposit and withdrawal of project funds and providing the cost thereof.

I'm sorry, motion to uh motion to approve.

Uh if I may.

Do you want to second?

Second.

Second, yes.

Uh so I I need to uh motion to hold for a tableclass public hearing.

Um, but I need to amend the bill first.

Um so the first motion I'd like to make is to amend the uh amend this bill to add the final plan um to it as an attachment.

Uh so motion to amend.

Second discussion.

So just briefly, um this adds the final plan to this legislation.

As members know this is something I've been working on since I took office.

Um this final plan will be mailed out.

It should actually be in the mail today as we're speaking here.

Uh all the property owners, business owners, um, and tenants within the district will be receiving the plan like they did for the uh first public hearing.

This uh second public hearing will be scheduled right after recess.

Um I believe uh we have the the date locked in as uh September second.

We'll have a second opportunity for a um for public hearing to hear feedback from uh folks within the district, uh property owners through in the district specifically.

Uh and from that point forward, uh we will have a 45-day clock where we will um accept votes for or against this plan.

Um that is all governed by uh state statute.

That is the next step here.

Um and I ask for member support um you know as as we move forward.

I I I just want to address something quickly.

You've this has come up.

I think it's finally starting to get the attention that it deserves um in the media here.

One of the comments that was made um on local radio was that you know, if we do this in Southside, the next thing we're gonna do is uh form a business improvement district in downtown or Oakland.

Well, those already exist.

And you know, just want to say that this is how modern thriving business districts are run.

Um we looked, you know, all throughout the the nation at other business districts and successful business districts all have this.

This is not a tax.

Um I think that is is very important to make sure everybody's aware.

It's not a tax, it's an assessment that stays within the district.

The district controls how it's spent.

If the district decides that they want to, you know, um spend money in a way that maybe the city wouldn't do, um they can do that.

That's their their choice.

This isn't something that you know creates a slush fund for anyone on the district for me for the for the city for anything else.

This is is truly the district taking control of its own destiny here.

Um and you know, I think it is it is the most important thing that I can do in my time in office here.

So uh with that, um I would like to motion to hold for cable cast public hearing.

Second discussion.

Discussion.

I think we need to vote.

I'm sorry.

We haven't voted on the amendment yet, so we're still discussing the amendment.

That's why you're the chair.

Well, is there is there any further discussion on the amendment?

Okay.

Seeing none.

Um all those in favor of amending bill turning in front of me.

518.

518, please say aye.

Aye.

Bill has been amended and now a motion.

Motion to hold for cable cast public hearing.

Second, that's it.

Discussion.

The second public hearing is required by state statute.

Correct.

Okay.

Yep.

Yeah, we have to have two uh two public hearings.

The first one was on the preliminary plan.

Um there were some small adjustments from the preliminary plan to the second secondary plan, but two mailings.

Um you will also have seen that I have spent a ton of money out of postage you know, to make this happen.

And also my my staff uh and the clerk staff has spent a lot of time stuffing envelopes because the it is too big of a plan for us to do it with a machine.

So okay.

Um thank you.

Yeah.

Councilman Conkell.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Let me get this straight.

So you're getting you're gonna put uh like a uh something for them to vote on, is that right?

Yes business and property owner within that complaint.

Property owners, not the business.

Okay, property ownership.

Not to case okay, okay.

That's interesting.

And it's gonna be like governed by the state or state statute dictates how these are are created.

Um it is the neighborhood improvement district law.

Um I forget when it was last updated, something like 2013.

Um so OBID and PDP were created out of the previous statute.

Uh we will be the first.

Yeah.

Yeah.

So uh I'll be interested to see your results.

So good good job.

I mean, I know you've worked hard on it, so you explained it well.

Yeah.

Further discussion.

Seeing none.

Well, I I'll obviously I'll give you congratulations when you get it over the finish line, but congratulations to the point um that you're our today.

I know that it's taken um you've taken all the necessary steps, not just mandated, but to socialize the idea to have a trial run with what it would look like with uh, you know, um uh a business improvement manager on site and that sort of thing with the support of others.

So um you've taken all the right steps to demonstrate the success that could be if you get this over the finish line.

And I um you know, I hope that that um hope that that happens.

Thank you.

Yeah.

All right.

All those in favor of holding Bill 518 for cable cast public hearing, please say aye.

Aye.

We will hold for public hearing.

And if the Madam Clerk and colleagues will indulge me, we will now move to the one bill in recreation you can senior services committee.

That is Bill 773.

Of course, take your time.

Yeah, this is good.

Bill 773.

Resolution transferring the amount of 200,000 to the Department of Parks of Recreation from the Stop Devon Trust Fund for staffing and supplass to support out-of-school time services and programming at McKinley Recreation Center.

Motion to approve discussion.

I'll defer to the bill sponsor.

So again, you know, we saw this happen last week, moving money to a rec center that doesn't have city services.

If that's the vehicle that we'll be using to fund these programs, I want to make sure that my district, folks at Upper McKinley that do summer and after school and senior programming and don't receive uh you know any funding from the city that they have the opportunity as well.

So we introduce this legislation and I will ask for member support in passing this.

Okay.

So next is Councilmember Warwick.

Yeah, I just wanted to say, you know, this is great.

Thank you, Councilman, for introducing this.

Um, you know, I think that this is a good you know, first step.

These are two I mean, you know, obviously Bergwen and now and and this bill for McKinley, you know, these are city facilities where we have community groups providing services that uh we the city provide in our own rec centers, right?

Like you know, comparable services.

And um I think it's important that we as the city are invested in those services, and um I would you know love to see that you know, every kid in Pittsburgh have out of school and you know, out you know, after school and summer programming, yeah, you know, quality free after school and summer programming available close to home.

Uh and um I think that's something that we can do.

I mean, you know, it's not gonna happen all at once, but starting uh starting in locations that are both high need as well as um in our actual own buildings, I think is a is a great first step.

So um I appreciate the councilman uh you know putting forward this bill for his his uh his district.

Thanks.

Any further discussion?

Councilman Cockell.

Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair.

Um I was supportive of Council, you know, the Berwin.

Bergwin.

Uh I thought that was a good use of the Stop the Violence Fund.

I really did it.

I think uh, you know, fits the criteria.

And I think we could probably all make the argument that we have something, all of us have something in our district that could use those funds that could go towards whether it's programming for children or you know, you name it.

Um Councilman Charlotte, you have inspired me.

I have a couple of uh, you know, the um things that uh places that I know could desperately use this money and they reach out to children and and and you know they're ideal for this.

So I don't think there's anything wrong with it.

I'll be supportive of your your bill, Councilman Charlotte.

I was supportive of Councilwoman Warwick's and um again I feel like it's good use of the money, and whether it's in print or not, uh I will um I will gladly support any council member who has a need as long as we could justify the need for programming or whatever it is or facility in your district to use this stop the violence fund, a small piece of the stop the violence fund.

So you know if it's uh we start with 200,000 uh per council district.

I think that's um I think that's great.

I think utilizing that money in a constructive way that we know where we could put it and it will make a big difference.

So I'll be supportive of both.

And I hope if and when I propose something, you'll also be supportive.

So thank you.

Councilmember Warbeck.

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't see a hand.

There's a lot going on over here.

Council.

Councilman's.

I just want to again congratulate both of you on a great program and the inspiration.

We will be looking uh to do the same thing at Ream Rec Center in Mount Washington.

Um I just want to let folks know that we are we are looking at that.

Um this is a great program.

We have um rec centers that do you know great deals of of work and and and good work with the community with the kids and get nothing in return.

So I think this is an enormous opportunity for us to create some more programming where there is none.

So uh I thank you both uh for this.

Thank you.

Okay, second round, Councilmember Warbeck.

Yeah, and I just um just because I know that they're you know that we we are talking specifically about stop the violence funding.

I think that I I would love to find all types of funding, right, to do this kind of work.

But I do want to just just um underscore that you know the stop the violence fund is specifically for high need communities that are impacted by gun violence and the kids who come from those communities, right?

So that that would be just something as sort of a reminder overall when we are talking about these funds, which is the case, I believe, Councilman, in is it belt it's Belt Hoover, right?

In Bell Touver and also in uh in Glen Hazel.

So thanks.

Yeah, thanks.

Council President Lavell.

Thank you.

I will support this today, but I do just want to say that I don't believe this is the most appropriate use of these of these funds, or this is the appropriate source for what the council man is trying to achieve, but although I'll be supportive today, I just want to remind members that these funds were specifically set aside for violence prevention efforts, specifically to reduce homicides, 80% of which are at unfortunately due to gun violence.

And so these funds are designed to do specifically that.

And of which, if you talk to those sort of in the field doing the work, they'll tell you there's maybe 30 to 50 truly, truly bad actors, and then there's maybe another 500 or so that are on the edge of potentially becoming a bad actor or potentially having something better happen with their lives, and these funds are designed to really get at that target population.

And if you talk to Director Shelton, if you talk to Cornell Jones and others, what they'll tell you is the rec centers do not bring in those target populations.

They're not there, they're not going there, no matter how much they try to program, those that that population of youth are not going to our rec centers.

And so while, yes, I agree with all my colleagues that having robust rec centers, having robust after school activities is very important, and we should be funding that, that this source of funding is not the appropriate vehicle to do that because it this source of funding is not doing targeting our rec centers is not a tr dealing with our specific use of funding.

What they will also tell you is what we could do is there are programs out there, and I'll point to CAFE Momentum as momentum as one example that truly, truly is dealing with that target population.

Um that there are those 500 youth, there are programs out there that are absolutely working with them and doing good work, but maybe they truly need the rec center open till midnight.

I'm just making this up on a Friday or a Saturday evening.

And so while we may not have to staff it, if we were to provide the vehicle where they could truly do a midnight basketball league or some other activity, that that would be the better use of funding to put it to those organizations that are really doing the work, and then we provide the resource, the place for them to act for them to uh be at no expense.

Long story short, again, I understand why council is doing this, and I'm supportive because the money is sitting there, and if we could put that money to some good use, why not?

So I totally get it.

I'm just making a longer term argument of how we should be expending these dollars.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Further discussion.

I was just gonna sort of underscore what Council President just said and say I'll support today.

And but you know, I think we all know that this isn't a long-term approach, and I really look forward to seeing the allocation plan from the Stop the Violence Committee because or task force because, you know, I think that we both want to learn from lived experience from those in the communities saying this is what we need and the data that demonstrates who were, you know, the effectiveness of uh various approaches that we've tried before, what's needed now versus what we needed in 2021, and also um uh you know, what's working in other in other similar cities.

And I, you know, I I just have council former councilwoman Kale Smith's words ringing in my ears.

We throw money at the at the youth and nothing seems to be changing.

Um I don't think that's actually the case right now, but I I fear that if we continue to, you know, um uh do what we feel what what we think feels good and not what is data informed that we won't actually be addressing the challenges facing the city today with regard to youth violence and violence in general.

So um I really look forward to seeing what the the allocation plan um uh what that looks like and what the task force comes up with in that regard.

Council Councilwoman Gross.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um yes, I I also want to do both.

I'm definitely supportive today.

I definitely am eager to see kind of like the learning lessons and how the stop the violence plan and and funds move forward because there's been some learning experience now.

I think there's some really great examples out there and some great programs.

Thank you, Councilman Lavelle.

But I'm also a reminder, as I said last week, though the last time we talked about this, let's also focus on our parks and rec budget and opening these rec centers because there's a separate other value to creating social networks in neighborhoods, to creating safe places, but also creating those bonds between people.

I'm often reminded when we're um working with our residents who are concerned about schools and school closures that you lose that people to people connection, right?

When all the school all the kids in a neighborhood don't go to the same school or their school is gone and now they all go to different schools.

Parents don't even know each other, let alone the kids knowing each other.

And our rec centers can fill in that gap and used to fill in that gap.

And we have far too many closed rec centers or unstaffed rec centers, and we are underfunding parks and rec for far too long.

Because that creates the kind of social fabric that keep all of us safe.

It's important for all of us in whatever shape or form.

So thank you.

I appreciate it.

Councilman Wilson.

Yeah, thanks.

I I know that I've definitely been a part of conversations years ago, um, particularly with uh former councilman uh Ricky Burgess uh you know, about the stop the violence fund spending it on uh youth are youth like basically our rec centers and having after school programs.

Uh I know Philly has a great program where uh children literally walk to the after school program uh right after school.

I I know that this is something that um you know I disagree what I've disagreed with you know, only spending it on organizations that Santa Violence funds to that uh only spend it on directly that would impact uh individuals that would uh pick up a gun.

But I think we can do both, and that's why I always just thought it was it was, you know, it would be impactful to even I mean I always thought sorry, I always took uh you know the term violence to mean several things.

And I think for the general public, it it would seem that you know, spending it on after school programs or rec programs in the time of you know large uh groups of teens um you know being in certain areas and trying to meet up and and do activities that might be on what that would be unfavorable to a lot of people um you know would make sense to spend it on after school programs.

So I think that's you know definitely the sign of the times uh of why this would be a good argument to use stop the violence funds for that.

Uh but also I think what the difficulty is, and I've been a part of even the recent meeting is just to you know hear the amount of uh money that's in the Salt the Violence Fund and the time that it would take to there's been a lot of time to try and figure out how we spend money in this uh very specialized um but I think it would be special like people who work in this space would be specialized to to figure out how to stop individuals so they're not um acting out in terms of gun in terms of uh committing gun violence.

So definitely definitely want to spend money on that.

I just always thought there was a component that we could do more like a baseline measure that we could spend uh money in terms of um you know programming.

After school programming, even the programming that is happening at Perry High School, which I believe, you know, you know, is is uh is a good I'm talking about safe passages is a good use of uh stop the violence funds.

You know, we could I mean what's to stop us from ha entertaining conversations of how we move that move that type of model into our rec centers.

So I think it's a good conversation, and I just hope we can um continue to talk about uh how we have more of you know that that baseline programming uh throughout all the all the city of Pittsburgh and also at the same time look at this, look at this um look at the groups just like you know, the great example of of the of the restaurant who's the restaurant.

Oh, Cafe Momentum.

Cafe momentum, you know, but also at the same time do that.

So you know I think it's been set here at the table we can do multiple things at once, but um I've definitely always been interested in how we can have really great uh after school programming, mostly as just like that baseline that we go off of.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Further discussion, Councilmember Warbeck.

I do just just since we're talking about after school, I do want to um make a pitch for that you know there's a pilot program that is is still in the works.

We're still working on getting folks staffed up, but where um in communities where there is no after-school programming offered, you know, that we you know, our staff PPS buildings.

And I'm really looking forward to seeing how that pilot goes.

And I think that you know, with the school closures and and whatnot, there's definitely opportunity for us to be collaborating with PPS to make sure that you know, within within walking distance of people's homes.

There's uh there's an open door for kids after school and in the summer.

So thanks.

Thank you.

Did I see a hand over here?

Councilman Cockill?

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh first I I want to say um, yeah, I agree with you, Council President.

You know, we don't want to lose focus on what this money is is intended for.

And uh I that is not my goal by any means.

But again, I think all of us have at-risk youth in our district in one way or another.

I personally am not thinking recenter.

Um I know that we've talked about you know rec centers and investing in the rec centers.

I think that's great, and I'll be supportive of that.

Um I'll I'm not gonna mention a name right now, but I'm thinking of uh organization that works with at-risk youth in my neighborhood where I think this is like the perfect injection, meaning 200,000 to really give them the boost they need, show them the appreciation that I feel personally from uh the the work that that he does.

He brings Latino and all different nationalities together, and uh they have one common goal, and that's just to you know respect each other, uh have things to do, soccer, bone arrow, or archery, uh you name it.

So I'm not thinking rec center just for the record.

Um, but you know, I'll make that case when the time comes, and um hopefully you'll all find it justifiable to use a small portion, just a small portion is what we're talking about of the stop the violence fund, which I think will go a long way.

So that's just my thoughts.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you.

Any further discussion?

Since we've since Cafe Mo oh, sorry, go ahead.

I did just want to recognize that this isn't you know um this isn't like a conversation that I don't I mean, I don't know, I don't think anyone here is an expert on how to solve gun violence.

You know, I know there's a lot of experience here, but you know, I'm definitely, you know, since I sit on the committee, definitely willing to hire any expert to figure out how we get to this plan.

But for my understanding, like you know, to leave, I don't know.

I know this is a really uh difficult conversation to have, but I mean we need definitely need to get somewhere in terms of um using this money appropriately, you know, to to actually solve the issue with gun violence.

Uh and you know, the amount of money that is still in the account.

I think it's I'm gonna put a number out there.

It's 17 million.

No.

Six six, so eight?

It's about six, seven.

Six.

Six point five or something like that.

Okay, sorry, I don't know why I thought seventeen.

So, but that but it will be you know, there's another ten that comes in every year.

But anyway, the point is is you know, just to have that um that plan and I mean I'm I'm happy to even just be reminded here, like is this uh like this annual allocation plan if you allow interrogative could you remind me like how far we are in terms of getting to that?

So Monday?

Yeah, this past Monday, the steering committee met um and we began to sort of outline what the sort of three pillars related to how you spend the the funds down.

Um we also acknowledge that the last round of grants close on July 31st that were sent out to the various organizations, and so there's the effort to prepare for that, um, which will begin this fall.

And so you're we're probably about a month or two away from sort of having that plan ultimately together on what that looked like.

We did have preliminary, I'll say very preliminary numbers of if you how much money would be spent on prevention, how much money will be spent on intervention and reintegration.

Um so we did have preliminary numbers, but unfortunately, our the budget person wasn't able to attend on Monday, so we couldn't drill down on the specifics.

We're working through that, and this will be the first time we did it, right?

Well anyone else.

Yeah.

Okay, thanks.

I just wrote up.

I thought it was helpful, maybe just to get that on record, because uh I never told them that.

You know, everyone wants to see happen, so thanks.

Okay, thank you.

Any further discussion?

Just wanted to mention since Cafe Momentum was mentioned that uh there's they have their second pop-up at the city county portico today for lunch service, 1130 to 1.

Uh, momentum will be out there for meals for anyone who for the public, anyone who would like to grab lunch.

All right.

All those in favor of bill seven seventy-three, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

That will take us back to the top of the agenda.

Thank you all for your indulgence and taking those early.

It's a long agenda, my cursor still moving up.

All right, finance and law committee, supplemental new papers, bill seven seventy-six.

Resolution transferring the amount of two hundred and seventy dollars within the two thousand and twenty-six operating budget from the office of the city clerk administrative fees to the Department of Mobility and Infrastructure for the purpose of operational services.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Brief discussion.

Uh, this is the uh third piece of legislation I had today.

Just uh very small amount.

Uh we need to have some signs uh uh built in Knoxville, and this is uh to cover the cost of them.

So further discussion, Councilman Wilson.

27 dollars?

Okay.

Um seeing no further discussion, um, all those in favor of Bill 776, please say aye.

Aye.

And Madam Chair, can I cast eye on our amending bills?

If I can join again, well, you've got a pretty long agenda today.

So no doubt.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Bill 782.

Resolution amending resolution 740 of 2025, which provided for an agreement or agreements with Center for Hearing in Depth Services Inc.

in global wordsmith by increasing the authorized spend for global wordsmith by nineteen thousand dollars for services for two January 2027 for new total cost not to exceed 136,000 over five years.

Motion approved.

Second discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 782, please say aye.

Uh aye.

Thank you for your service.

Right.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 783.

Resolution further amending resolution 855 of 2011, effective December 29th, 2011 as amended entitled.

Resolution adopting and approving the 2012 Capital Budget and a 2012 community development block grant program and approving the 2012 through 2017 capital improvement program by adjusting various land items in conformance with city council's 2012 capital budget amendments by removing unencumbered funds from projects pending closure pursuant to chapter 218 of the city code.

Motion approved.

Second discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 783, please say aye.

Affirmative recommendation Bill 784.

Resolution further amending resolution 858 of 2014, effective January 1, 2015 as amended entitled resolution adopting and approving the 2015 capital budget and a 2015 community development block grant program and a 2015 through 2020 capital improvement program by removing unencumbered funds from projects pending closure pursuant to chapter 218 of the city code.

Motion approved.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 784, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation, Bill 785.

Resolution further amending.

Resolution 772 of 2016.

Effective January 1, 2017 as amended and titled.

Resolution adopting and approving the 2017 capital budget and a 2017 community development block grant program, approving the 2017 through 2022 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 785, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation, Bill 786.

Resolution further amending resolution 863 of 2018, effective January 1, 2019 as amended and titled.

Resolution adopting and approving the 2019 Capital Budget and the 2019 Community Development Block Grant Program.

Resolution adopting and approving the 2019 Capital Budget and the 2019 Community Development Block Grant Program in the 2019 through 2024 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 786, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 787.

Resolution further amending resolution 840 of 2019.

Effective January 1, 2020, entitled.

Resolution Adopting and Approving the 2020 Capital Budget and the 2020 Community Development Block Grant Program and the 2020 through 2025 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 787, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 788.

Resolution further amending resolution 647 of 2020.

Effective December 23rd, 2020, entitled Resolution Adopting and Approving the 2021 Capital Budget and the 2021 Community Development Block Grant Program and the 2021 through 2026 Capital Improvement Program by reappropriating and reallocating funds closed due to the requirements of Chapter 218 of the City Code.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none.

All in favor of Bill 788, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 789.

Resolution further amending resolution 886 of 2021.

Effective December 27, 2021, entitled.

Resolution adopting and approving the 2022 Capital Budget and the 2022 Community Development Block Grant Program and the 2022 through 2027 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 789, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation Bill 790.

Resolution further amending resolution 924 of 2024.

Effective December 18, 2024, as amended entitled.

Resolution adopting and approving the 2025 capital budget, the proposed 2025 community development program, and the 2025 through 2030 capital improvement program by reappropriating and reallocating funds closed due to the requirements of chapter 218 of the city code.

Motion approved.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 790, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 791.

Resolution further amending resolution 834 of 2025.

Effective December 21st, 2025, as amended entitled.

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.

Motion to approve.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 791, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Deferred papers, Bill 39.

Ordnance directing the Allegheny County Board of Elections to place before the qualified voters of the City of Pittsburgh at the 2026 May primary election.

A 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 a legislative session.

Motion hold one week.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none.

All in favor of a one-week hold on Bill 39, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Bill be held.

Bill 654.

Resolution amending resolution 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.

Second.

Discussion.

Council Member something we've been working towards with our police to have more cameras on Grandview Avenue.

Sorry.

I'm sorry, Kim.

I made you shut that off before.

Oh, I'm sorry.

But anyway, that's that's what this bill is.

It's it's to uh purchase cameras uh for uh Grandview Avenue to help to deter some of the illegal activity that's going on up there during during the evenings and late at night uh and and definitely on the weekends.

That's it.

Thank you.

Councilman Call County.

Yeah, I just want to say thank you.

I follow it closely, of course, and so does Lisa.

So uh any added measures up there is is wonderful.

So thanks again.

Thank you.

Further discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 654, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

New papers, Bill 756.

Resolution repealing items and resolution 363, effective May 30th, 2024, in order to rescind the sales.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 756, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 757.

Resolution providing for the sell of certain property acquired by the City of Pittsburgh at tax sales.

Items A through A.

539, Robert Street, District 6.

539, Robert Street, District 6, 805 Clarissa Street, District 6, 0, Rosetta Street, District 9, 1062, Premier Street, District 7, 6941, Mount Vernon Street, District 9, 0, North Mertland Street, District 9, 706 Brushman Avenue, District 9, 1408 Beach View Avenue, District 4, 0 Coast Avenue, District 4, 952 Eighton Street, District 1, 1457, Firth Street, District 1, 0, Brighton Place, District 6, 2316, North Charles Street, District 6, and 2651, Perry's Bill Avenue, District 6.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Discussion.

Councilwoman Gross.

If I may, we don't often see District 7 parcels.

And this one is just a tiny portion of land in someone's backyard that they I think already have a driveway on.

So just to just as a word, you know, just so we know that we're not kind of just going to the market for a parcel in Stanton Heights.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Further discussion.

So Pittsburgh.

Seeing none.

All in favor of Bill 757, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 758.

Resolution authorizing the execution of quick claim D conveying all of the city's right title on interest in into the property located at 7217 Monasolo Street in a 13th ward city of Pittsburgh and designated in the D Registry Office of Allegheny County is blocking 950, 174 F 136 to Marvin Miller for $3,000 relating to the full and final settlement of the case filed against the city.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Second.

Discussion?

Seeing none.

All in favor of Bill 758, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 759.

Resolution authorizing the issuance of a warrant in favor of Brian and Donna Albert for a single payment in 2026 in an amount not to exceed 515,000 in full and final settlement of litigation filed in the Allegheny County Court of Common, please.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 759, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 770.

Resolution further amending resolution 855 of 2011.

Effective December 29, 2011 as amended entitled Resolution Adopting and Approving the 2011 Capital Budget and the 2011 Community Development Block Grant Program and the 2011 through 2016 Capital Improvement Program by reducing district one neighborhood needs by $55,000 and increasing park reconstruction by $55,000.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Thank you.

Further discussion.

It is quite the 20-year-old program.

Thank you.

We all want to expend.

Okay.

Um all those in favor of Bill 770, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

That takes us to invoices.

Is there a motion on invoices?

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none.

All those in favor of invoices, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Invoices are approved.

Interdepartmental transfers.

Is there a motion?

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

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

Aye.

Aye.

Transfers are approved.

That moves us to P cards.

Is there a motion on P cards?

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

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

Aye.

P cards are approved.

Public safety and wellness committee chaired by Councilman Coghill.

Bill 744.

Resolution authorizing the mayor, Director of Public Safety, and Director of Human Resources and Civil Service to enter into an agreement or agreements with the Ross and Carol Nees Foundation for the purpose of receiving grant funds and an amount not to exceed $1 million to hire a head of talent acquisition.

Public safety to further the city's efforts in recruiting and retaining public safety staff.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 744, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Public works and infrastructure committee chaired by Councilwoman Salonetro.

Supplemental new paper, Bill 781 resolution authorizing the mayor and director of public safety to enter into an agreement or agreements with the United States Soccer Foundation for the purpose of receiving grant funds from the Mini Pitch Program Grant and any amount not to exceed 100,000 to install a mini pitch at the Orms Beach Recreation Center.

Second.

Okay, sorry.

No discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 781, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

New papers, Bill 752.

Resolution providing for supplemental agreement or agreements with Michael Baker International Inc.

for costs associated with the construction phase of the Charles Anderson Bridge Project providing for the payment of the cost thereof not to exceed $4 million,687 and increase of $250,000 eight hundred thirty-seven dollars and forty-seven cent from the previously legislated contract authorization reimbursable at 100%.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 752, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 753.

Bill 753.

Resolution authorizing the director of the Department of Finance and the Director of the Department of Mobility and Infrastructure on behalf of the City of Pittsburgh to enter into an amended agreement of sale with various property owners and the 17th ward of the city in order to advance the Newton Street project providing for the payment of the cost thereof not to exceed $1,124,727, an increase of $20,000 from the previous authorization.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 753, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 754.

Resolution authorizing the mayor and the director of the Department of Mobility and Infrastructure on behalf of the City of Pittsburgh to enter into a supplemental agreement or agreement with Johnson Mermorin and Thompson for costs associated with the final design phase of the West Carson Street Bridge project, providing for the payment of the cost thereof not to exceed $1,378,913 and 21 centre of $790,914 and 71 cent from the previously authorized agreement reimbursable at 95%.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion seeing none, all in favor of Bill 753, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 754.

Resolution authorizing the mayor and director of the Department of Mobility and Infrastructure on behalf of the City of Pittsburgh to enter into a supplemental agreement or agreements with John Simorin and Thompson for costs associated with the final design phase of the West Carson Street Bridge Project, providing for the payment of the cost thereof, not to exceed $1,378,913 and $21, an increase of $790,914 and 71 cent from the previously authorized agreement reimbursable at 95%.

Motion to approve.

Second discussion discussion.

Sorry.

Good morning, everybody.

Jeff Skellikan, Director for Domi.

Eric Sutler, Chief Engineer, Dellmy.

Can you give us a little bit more uh explanation as to why we're um increasing it so much?

Sure.

Um, this is for the West Carson Street Bridge project.

So um we have completed the preliminary engineering phase of the project, which is what was initially authorized, and now we have completed negotiation for the scope of work for final design.

Um that's what we're adding through this contract.

So with most of these projects, um they're kind of broken into those two phases.

We authorize the first part first.

Once that information is determined, we can um you know negotiate the final design scope and then we add that amount.

So this is an already negotiated cost.

It is right, correct.

And this was uh understood from the beginning that we would be adding this as we got to this appropriate part of the project.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

Further discussion?

Okay.

Seeing none, all those in favor of bill 754, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Thank you so much.

755.

Thank you.

Presolution.

Resolution authorizing the mayor, the director of the Department of Public Works, and or the director of the Department of Finance to enter into an agreement or agreements with PI companies for the purpose of reconstructing a portion of the City of Pittsburgh's three River Heritage Trail for an esplanade redevelopment project at no cost to the city.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 755, please say aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

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

Bill 1545.

Ordinance amending the Pittsburgh Code Title IX Zoning, Article 1, Introduction and Establishment, Chapter 902 Zoning Districts in General to add inclusionary zoning and zoning, Article 3, overlay zoning district to add a sunset clause to 90704 AIZO, inclusionary housing overlay district, Articles 4, development standards to amend 91507, performance point system, Article T based zoning, Chapter 905 special purpose district, Article 4, Planning District, Chapter 908 Public Realm District, Chapter 909, Plan Development District, Article 5, Use Regulations, Chapter 911, Primary Uses, Chapter 912, Accessory Uses and Structures, Chapter 913, use exceptions and conditions not listed in use table, Article 6, Development Standards, Chapter 914, parking, loading and access.

Chapter 916, residential compatibility standard, Article 8, review and enforcement, Chapter 922 Development Review Procedure to remove minimum off-street parking from the zoning code, Article 5 use regulations, Chapter 912 accessory uses and structures.

Article 9, measurements and definitions, Chapter 925 measurements, and Chapter 926 definitions.

Second.

Discussion.

I'll just say something about procedure.

And I think that's all that I'll say for now.

Um let's see.

So the bill that was amended by substitution and then sent back to planning commission was approved by planning commission and in um in June, sent back over to council.

And prior to it being sent to Planning Commission, um city planning, our zone, our zoning administrator and city planning made some amendments to it prior to it sent being sent to planning commission to bring it in conformity to the bonus point programs that already exist in the city.

And that is what um planning commission voted on.

And so therefore the amendments today reflect the change that changes that were made prior to it being sent to planning commission.

Um we have our zoning administrator here today to if if anyone would like to hear from her.

Um but really the point of it being brought today is that we do need to call for another public hearing on this bill.

And um this would allow us, you know, and the public all recess to be able to absorb what's in the bill, absorb the changes that have been passed by the planning commission, absorb the conditions that have been placed on the bill by the planning commission and have those weeks to really uh understand it prior to a public hearing being held in uh early September.

So wanted to make sure to give everyone time to sort of understand, hopefully vote on amending my substitution today and then understand what's in there before taking any further action, which be would be a public hearing.

So that's all I have for now.

Councilwoman Gross.

Did other members have a first?

So I'm just trying to follow that narrative because I don't think it really I understood it.

So thank you for describing that.

So council approved an amendment.

To our bill.

You did an amendment by substitution.

I think I recalled I voted no.

But but anyway, so that text file went to planning commission for review and recommendation.

Which it's supposed to do as per ordinance.

But reviewed instead a planning department text.

Correct.

So the we didn't get a review of the text that we sent to them.

Correct.

That seems out of order to me.

I don't know.

Okay, so we should send them back the text that it again, admittedly, I voted on it.

But they're supposed to review the text we send them.

I I am I am not I have been told that this is the time that we have to amend by substitution what was reviewed by the planning commission.

But they didn't review what we've sent them.

So if we send them something new again and they could not review that and just review whatever they want.

So I think we all need to take them and understand what's going on.

I'll admit I just asked for a legal opinion that council voted no on yesterday on something else, but it's not following procedure.

And it's supposed to follow by ordinance.

So I'll I'll let other members say what what their part is.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Councilmember Warwick.

Um I I can't speak to the procedure.

What I I do want to uh so I guess I would like so if if we're we're looking at doing a public hearing uh in you said early September, so we're gonna shoot.

It would have to be sometime after council recess.

That's all.

Yeah, I mean I would really like so this I can't I can't go to my neighborhood groups with this, right?

Like I would I would like to go because if there are some major changes uh it again I don't I don't know what the changes are in the text.

Yeah, so it if this is new text that has come that the that the um zoning team approved via planning commission that we haven't seen yet, I don't feel comfortable voting on it without uh uh understanding it myself a and also um I would like to be able to make sure that my community groups can understand it too is if that's possible.

I don't know if we want to call.

Yeah, sure.

Come on up.

So and I'll I'll I'll let other members uh ask questions.

So I just want to to to um is it possible to get, I guess even if it's just a one-on-one call a summary of this so that either either have someone from the zoning team come to my community groups and explain this, because that's what we did before, right?

With the the back at the very beginning of the of the HA, right?

Like way, way, way, way back at the beginning.

Um is that something that um that the department would be open to doing?

And if not, I would like to be able to do it as best I can, so I would need some kind of uh of a summary that I can share.

Uh good morning, council uh Carolyn Ristil, zoning administrator for the city of Pittsburgh.

Um we are absolutely open to working with you to figure out the best way to to prepare materials, um, figuring out staffing so that we can help you reach out to your communities and explain what's in this bill.

It's it's a very long bill.

It's it's covering multiple topics.

It is very complicated.

Okay.

That's all for me for the moment.

Yeah, thank you.

Thank you.

Further discussion.

Second round, but first round, Councilman Wilson.

Okay, so I um didn't go straight to the to the um the note on here for a public hearing because I was handled this pack with a yellow paper on it.

So I thought maybe there was an amendment to do here before it went to a public hearing.

So that's not the case.

Um to take a step back for a second, um the council, as uh uh council member Strasberger stated, made a recommendation on uh an amended by substitution version of this bill that went to planning commission, planning commission reviewed that plus recommendations from staff, and they voted to um make positive recommendation, provided it's amended by substitute with the staff uh uh language that we worked with council person Strasburger on.

Um and so this is different than the the prior iteration that was at this table.

So it's been changed already.

Yes.

So what what's this with with like why is it underlined and bolded?

Like is this showing what was changed at the planning commission?

Um is this language that was added?

It looks like a bonus goals and points.

I don't think that oh, yes, this this first item.

It looks like it looks like you're showing what what was changed.

So this package um we did format it the way that we uh typically format legislation.

Um so all of the changes, including the ones you have seen before, are underlined or struck out.

Um there is no uh distinguishing characteristics between the those edits that you haven't seen before and the ones that you have.

Uh so I sorry, I have a similar experience.

I had a similar experience at the planning commission.

For the I I misspoke.

It wasn't for the vape shop, it was for the it was for the um the North Shore Entertainment District.

You weren't the signage one?

Yeah, okay.

It's a signage one.

So is that you weren't here, but we did a lot, we did changes to the bill at the planning commission.

Planning commission vote on those changes.

Yes.

And I'm pretty sure we did do that on the vape shop bill as well.

That that we did amendments, so what is the command amendment?

What's the mechanism that allows that to take place at the planning commission?

The planning commission has the authority to make conditions, um, and their their condition was that it would be amended by substitute with the substitute language in its entirety.

Yeah.

I mean, I look I since I've been a part of a similar, you know, the process like this, which seems like this is what it would happen.

Um I liked it because it prevents any like council just sending a bill over.

Um 50 times I mean how many times are we gonna bring it back here and talk like it's still something we vote on.

It's still something that you know, like for instance the the entertainment district one.

I actually thought it was even though I had some criticism on you know how um we were working with with uh planning commission at the time and their resistance to just vote on it.

Like I did just want the planning commission just to vote on what was written.

But um we ended up going back to the drawing board and saying, okay, what are our goals here?

We had a pretty good robust discussion with the stakeholders and everything.

And so I did think that was really productive because it did just get to the heart of like, okay, what are you trying to accomplish here?

Like this isn't just some you know authorization, you know, authorizing you know the mayor to to you know spend up to a certain amount on you know a bridge.

It was or going to come into contract.

It was uh we're changing the code.

So I did appreciate the in-depth uh you know conversations around that and organizing that happened, and then they ultimately voted on something that you know came back to council uh and we voted on it.

So we could have just voted it down if we didn't like it.

Yes.

And then we just you know sent back something if we just literally wanted the planning commission to keep on doing that and saying no, we we only want you to vote on these words.

You could but we did have a very robust discussion about how we're gonna try to accomplish you know the goal we're trying to accomplish.

So you know, being a part of this, you know, I um I I did have um I did think it was good that we did that.

And I I think you know, we came out on the other side where Planning Commission was able to implement, I'm sorry, planning staff would be able to implement something, especially with enforcement or um approve any application or or approving the zoning.

You know, they felt comfortable that they could they could do that.

Yes.

And so I thought that was also an important key, that was like the key thing.

Like, you know, I remember Corey Laman saying, like, I I don't even know how I would do that.

You know, and then you got the stakeholders say, well, this is you know, just do this.

And it's like, I don't like what am I gonna do?

Hire 10 more staffers to do like we have the work within our means.

And so uh I did think it was very productive because it it did you know reflect what the planning staff could actually accomplish.

So that was that one instance, but um so I'm not aware of everything that took place here, but I will say that this isn't this is common.

It's it's common.

I've I've gone through it several times.

Yes, thank you.

If I may, just uh I just want to clarify a few things.

One is um I sent you all an email last week just informing you that this would be coming back to council.

And at that point, and actually today, I was under under the impression that we were not going to be taking action on any amendment by substitution, that we were simply going to be holding the bill that we sent to planning commission to public hearing.

Um and then at that point we would have the copy of what Planning Commission recommended along with their conditions to absorb, to understand, and if you want to take to community groups.

Um I think that there was just a little bit of internal miscommunication or assumptions made that amending my substitution before would be give the best opportunity for the public to understand what's in it, right?

Form if it's on the books, that cut creates a little bit of a conundrum for us because we um uh we have not yet so it's not been show socialized with council, and we have not yet absorbed what's in it.

So to take action now, I understand doesn't feel appropriate for a lot of members who haven't had the chance to actually read what's in it.

Um it is a bit of a conundrum.

I personally would like to act only in the form of holding for public hearing today, so that we can just get the public hearing scheduled.

Since we have a recess coming up, since we have all this time that you know won't allow us to um work on this kind of in the intervening weeks.

I I would like to move forward so that we can at least get the public hearing scheduled.

Um I can certainly, you know, um uh we can talk at a table here.

I'm comfortable with that.

This isn't this is just public procedure.

Um as to what the weighing the benefits and the downsides of um having us act on the bill that was before us um that we passed, um, move to um holding for public hearing and then um amending by substitution, you know, the next time that we meet after we've had the opportunity to review it prior to actually holding the public hearing or after, whatever procedure calls for.

Can we do Sigram?

Yeah, absolutely.

So I I do want to respond a little bit to the notion that this is how things always happen, because it really is not.

Um we've seen a lot of packets come back from planning commission in the last 10-12 years.

And conditions are usually like, you know, four bullet points, maybe five.

You know, change this sentence.

Maybe do some really technical corrections.

You you missed the numbering, you know, we want it renumbered this way.

There may be something a little more substantive.

But this is a a large packet.

So is any administrator I'm gonna put you on the spot a little bit?

And could you read for me?

Which of the zoning base layers this amends.

So we all understand that what we sent was an overlay.

And this is amending zoning districts across the city.

So starting at the top.

Uh to clarify, do you want me to read it as summarized here?

Or do you think that's what we're doing?

You don't have to be name all of the details.

I want to know.

So council members generally know which parts of their district are which zoning categories.

So which zone are you re you know, amending only LNC?

So you you want the actual.

I want to know like you to say which zoning categories are being amended.

Yeah.

Um I will state the the district names.

The high level summary is any zoning district that allows multi-unit residential is being amended to allow for the affordable housing bonus option.

Including and 60 additional height, sixty additional feet of height.

So yeah, since I have the floor.

But go ahead and just read them.

Uh so that would be the RM, which is the multi-unit residential.

That is the NDO, which is neighborhood office, that is the LNC, which is the local neighborhood commercial.

That is NDI, which is neighborhood industrial, UNC, which is urban neighborhood commercial, HC, which is highway commercial, GI, which is general industrial UI, which is urban industrial.

The UCMU, which is the urban center mixed use, is also included, but that already has the ability to use the affordable bonus points.

Um we were just cleaning up the language to be consistent with the other districts.

Uh the same with the urban center employment, uh, the UCE, that also currently has affordable housing bonus option.

Because of the changes to the language, we had to make some changes in that district.

Also the RMU, the residential mixed use already has affordable housing bonus, cleaning up the language to be consistent.

Uh the Riverfront zoning district with its five subdistricts, again, currently has the affordable housing bonus program, and we're just cleaning up the language for consistency.

With additional 60.

Uptown public realm is another zoning district that already has the affordable housing bonus program, and we're just cleaning up the language to be consistent.

Uh which is station square.

Let's see.

I misspoke.

We are not um the edits is p for station square.

Look like they are um they are the same that you had seen before.

It's just the parking edits um in that district.

And then I believe that would be that would be the the list of the districts.

So probably one of the things that would be helpful would be to have like that highlighted.

I don't know if this is on an engage page and it already lists those right at the top.

But people generally know, you know, in their neighborhoods, I don't know, in my district, people know in their neighborhoods what zoning is near them, um, what their business district zoning is, et cetera, et cetera, so that they can better visualize kind of like what near me is going to change.

Um so I appreciate that.

So I think that's one of the to other members' points.

Like this is so different from what we sent over.

We've we haven't that we don't actually even know what's in here.

Um which brings me to my other point, which is that procedurally, what happens in ordinance is that the planning commission was like, no, we don't like what council sent us.

This is like a radically different plan that we're sending to council, right?

They so much so many changes, so many base layer changes for the affordability part, which didn't have base layer changes in the affordability plan that we again, I voted no on it, but that's what council sent them.

That it needs it's this thick and and it needs to be an amended by substitution because it's just such a big, big, it's just not the same document at all that we sent over.

So what the ordinance says the planning commission to is to do this they rejected the plan that we sent over.

They should send us back a rejection, and then council can overrule the rejection with seven votes.

But we are we can't do that because we now you're putting this in front of us without a ruling on the other bill that we actually sent you.

Um so it you didn't accept the bill we sent you.

You you've sent us a counter proposal.

And so I just feel that you it it in a way takes away council's option to overrule the planning commission's rejection.

So I don't think we are debating this here.

Um so I I'm just kind of you know processing this out loud, trying to think through it, which is the I think the point of standing committee.

So yeah, those are my thoughts right now.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you.

I'm gonna take just um a little bit out of order because what has I'm not gonna argue with what councilwoman gross just said procedurally, um, but uh I just wanted to state that what's my understanding that the intention of the changes that were made prior to at the recommendation of city planning prior to it being sent to planning commission were to uh to councilman Wilson's earlier point, we're to simplify the administration of the affordable housing bonus point program, right?

What would have happened before uh with a version that council passed um while it was um legally defensible, it probably would have been much more difficult for planning staff to administer because it would have established a wholly separate bonus point program and scheme from the ones that we already have.

So that what um what I understand was that with major changes were bringing what was passed by council into conformity with existing bonus point programs that already exist, RIV, Oakland plan, up town, which then to the point that Councilwoman Gross just made requires several changes throughout various points of it, but the actual changes that were made are very simple to understand, and in fact, anyone can go on to the planning commission's um, and I'm sure we can receive a copy of this planning commission's um uh the slide deck that was presented and see that the the actual substance of the changes are are fairly simple, but require because of zoning requires like amendments to various you know subcategories of various districts.

So anyway, just wanted to state that I believe Council President Lavelle had a comment next, and then Councilmember uh Warwick and Councilmember Salonetro.

Council President.

Oh, sorry, we're having a sidebar.

So I'm gonna try to split hairs a little bit.

Um so I pulled up the summary from the planning commission where their decision date was January 29, 2025, and they sent over to Councilman Gross's point.

The Planning Commission made a positive recommendation on City Council's bill with, and then they have about six one, two, yeah, six bullet points that are then reflected in all of this.

And it says with the following conditions to be amended at the time of introduction at City Council.

But we as a body have not determined whether or not we want to accept those conditions, is and so that's sort of where we're stuck at the moment.

But yet in still, no matter what, we have to hold a public hearing on this thing.

And so my recommendation would be to hold this bill for a public hearing make the all of this stuff in the summary public so that the public can come down and make comment on whether or not they believe we should accept these conditions and then council should then take up this bill and decide whether or not we want to accept these conditions in whole in part or what we want to do with it is just my sort of my own thinking of how to sort of parse this out if that makes any sense to members.

So thank you.

Councilmember Warwick followed by Councilmember Salonitro Yeah so I just want to reiterate I mean so overall I mean I know what I think right like I I'm very disappointed that we voted down mandatory IZ and large projects right that's sort of and and I recognize that this um you know optional I Z was put forward.

You know that be that as it may how I vote on this I I really so I remember back I mean the the and I don't even honestly remember the context whether it was about an IZ bill or whether it was about there was some other bill around like personal care I can't remember.

But I do remember having a community meeting and getting lots and lots of phone calls where folks in my district just regular folks right not people who are like zoning you know um zoning savvy or whatever were beside themselves just about something that they'd read or whatever they were like they're gonna build an apartment building right in the middle of my residential you know what I mean and so you know we have these annual community meetings and the timing was such that we were you know my my office and I was were able in each meeting to have up a map of the neighborhood to be like okay like here's you know just to calm people's just to help them understand that that you know this didn't mean necessarily what they thought it meant.

This is big and this this feels big enough that again I would really appreciate some and we can talk about how to do it but some type of forum where I am giving the members of my you know of of my like the residents in my district an opportunity to come and to understand even if it is like a repeat because we've been talking about this for for so many years at this point that more more than just a public hearing right like because you know we know that public you can organize and people can come down but I actually want to make sure that people understand and I don't want them to just get you know you know no knock on our friends in the press but I I I want them I want to be able to give them an in-depth explanation.

I ideally it would be someone from the planning team that was that could do that you know together with me that that would probably be better than than just with me.

So if that's something that that we can work out and as far as the the timing goes I mean if we could push a public I mean at least the vote I don't know about that I mean when the public hearing happens I don't anticipate people coming down for for public hearing necessarily but just to have be able to explain to the public and that'll help me make a more informed vote because so much has changed and I know that even though I'm disappointed that this is not mandatory IZ it feels like these changes go beyond that just in terms of height and what can you know what what can happen in a in a given community so I'll leave it at that council member Salmetro.

Yeah I um obviously I wasn't here in 2025 when this bill was uh first introduced so uh Carolyn I would need for you to um also agree to come to my community both in the West end and in Mount Washington since we're making changes to the Grandview public realm um and uh there it's very touchy for them.

You know they're very protective of that of that uh zoning so it's this this is a lot of changes when I didn't know the beginning of it so it's very hard to for me to um make a decision on what we should do with this today but I definitely want to make sure that my community is informed um both the West End and Mount Washington about everything that's changing here today.

Thank you.

Yeah we'd be very happy to to work with any of the council members that would like us to tell provide educational materials and ideally we would also be able to provide staffing to come out to those events.

Further discussion?

So just to reiterate, what I thought we were doing today, which is what I communicated to you all by council as information, not as deliberation by email, I think last Thursday or maybe Friday, was that we would be taking action to vote to hold the bill that we you know that we pass that we are familiar with for cable cast public hearing.

Um we can still do that today.

And if that's if council members are comfortable with at least that action to keep the ball rolling on this while um we absorb, you know, while everyone absorbs some of the changes here and has deliberation discussion over the next several weeks, then that is that is possible.

That is a possible vote today.

I think just to th throw it out there, the only other option that we have before us could be to um to hold the bill to hold the bill.

Um that would require us to extend to you know to extend, to extend to file for an extension or vote on an extension because then we'll be butting up against the 120-day um um time frame since the last public since between Planning Commission action and our um public hearing, our vote.

So can we do both of those as motions right now?

I don't know how that works.

The other ones have bill numbers, the extensions of bill numbers.

Sorry, for the extension, we would have to have a separate piece of legislation.

This is a vote for a public hearing.

So anyway, um that's I think those are some of our the options before us.

Do we have time to do the extension as a new paper?

Do we have time to do the extension as a new paper after?

I don't know the answer to that off the top of my head.

Yeah.

Um council member okay, we could do it Monday.

Councilman Wilson.

Oh, motion to hold for cable counts public hearing.

Second.

Discussion.

Councilwoman Gross.

Yeah, it was appealing to me that we just do the hold.

Um so, Madam Clerk, I don't know if you have dates in front of you.

I'll give you a minute here.

When do we run up or if anyone else at the table knows when we run up against the and that's a shame that we're at the 120 day clock?

That's a very long time.

That's like four months.

Um and we're just this is just on standing committee now.

When was it passed at or when was this positively this thing that isn't the bill we sent them positively recommended?

I don't have the planning commission day on the top of my head, but I have the 120 days off the top of my head.

So the 120 days expires uh September 30th for this.

So because of the the recess, we um I think that's part of the reason why we're we're taking this action.

Like we're not right up at the edge of the 120, but because of recess, this would be a good time to report recommendation was uh received June twelfth.

It's when they vote on it that the clock starts.

I'm not mistaken.

So it doesn't start when we receive it, but starts when the planning commission voted on it.

June 2nd was the hearing.

Thank you.

So I'm assuming the 120 days from June 2nd is September 30th that you gave.

So September 30th, and then um so we could hypothetically just do the motion to hold.

Um and then we can figure out what we're really having the you know public hearing on and take it up after recess.

We can introduce on I think it's August 30th, the first day back, the paper to do the extension.

Um it's a Friday that we have, I think uh regular meeting at the end of August.

Maybe it's not even the 30th, maybe it's like the August 28th, 28th.

Yeah, so we we could do an extension on August 28th.

So I'd actually prefer to to digest this a little more before we motion to for the public hearing.

Further discussion?

Councilman Cockell.

Yeah, um I understand all points.

Um I mean, um I'm I think it makes complete sense what the council president said.

You know, we have weeks to mull over this and check and fact check and talk to zonings, talk to planning if we need to be.

And at that point we could we could deny it or or approve it.

So uh so I don't I don't want to be belager the process.

I think uh, you know, it's ample time for us to learn what's what's in it, what we don't like.

And quite frankly, I feel like yes, it's a lot of changes.

It's a big packet.

But in reality, to me, at least on the surface, doesn't seem like there's a whole lot of changes, to be honest with you.

So minor details that needed to be worked out for legal purposes and documentation.

So um so I'm fine with proceeding as the council president suggested if uh if the will of the body is there further discussion.

Councilmember Salonetra.

Let me ask you if we approve this today for um a public hearing and it comes back to the table.

Can we still make changes after that if there's something in there that we don't, you know what we can still make changes at that point?

Yeah, especially if it does not get to be voted on past the 30th.

I mean, you know, these things take time.

You're talking about going to community meetings, and not everyone has a monthly community meeting.

Sometimes they're bi-monthly.

So yeah, some people don't have community meetings.

So I'm just wondering, can we go past the date of September 30th, or is that a hard stop?

We can take extension.

I don't know if you want to answer interrogatory, either way.

Um the September 30th date is the the date per code that you would have to hold a public hearing unless an extension is agreed to in writing.

Um so if you make a motion to extend the date of the public hearing, um you can do that.

Umce the public hearing happens.

I believe it's 90 days that you would have to take action.

Um so you do have a period of time to digest the information from the public hearing before you have to take action.

Again, you can uh we can um agree to an extension in writing on that 90 days if more time is needed.

Councilwoman Gross.

Thank you.

If council members are are wanting to move forward with the public hearing, I would suggest that it not be scheduled right after recess.

Most of the committee meetings in my district don't meet in August.

And um what's today's date?

August 1st is what?

Saturday?

And uh so there isn't time, right, to have the discussions in the community.

It's August in Pittsburgh.

We're not gonna be we're gonna be having these discussions in the neighborhoods in September, which I think should happen before the public hearing, because it's not fair to people to be like, Well, you had the opportunity to vote or to show up and have public comment that nobody told you about it, and we didn't have a discussion about it in the neighborhood.

So it's gonna be tight anyway.

I think we're gonna end up doing the extension anyway, but if council members want to go ahead and motion for the public hearing, I would request, since the president controls chambers that the president of council not schedule this public hearing on the heels of August recess before we have time to go around to neighborhood groups that don't meet in August, right?

So we'll be meeting with our community groups in September.

Um and so it I think it's only fair to have the public hearing after council members have fair time to actually talk to the residents.

So and that that won't be until September.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Further discussion on the motion to hold for cable cast public hearing.

Okay.

All in favor of holding bill 1545 for cable cast public hearing, please say aye.

Okay.

Any no's any except uh abstentions?

Affirmative recommendation for holding cable task uh public hearing.

All right, thank you very much.

That moves us on to Bill 2026, Bill 8.

Madam Chair.

Um the center avenue in the Hill District was designated Main Street, and DCD is in town today, meeting with us about it, and so I have to get to that meeting.

So I just want to register an I vote for the remaining bills.

So noted, thank you.

Bill Eight or Ordnance Amending and Supplementing the Pittsburgh Code Title VII, Business Licensing, Article 7, Service Businesses, adding a new chapter 768, short-term rental housing.

Motion holds for eight weeks.

Second discussion.

Eight weeks.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of bill eight, of holding bill eight for eight weeks, please say aye.

Aye.

Bill will be held.

Bill 518.

I'm sorry, Bill New Papers, Bill 760.

Resolution further amending resolution 840 of 2019, effective January 1, 2020 is amended and titled resolution adopting and approving the 2020 capital budget and the 2020 community development block grant program, approving the 2020 through 2025 community improvement program by reducing 31st war community action group by 468.49 cent and increasing Lincoln Place Presbyterian Church by 468.49 and authorize a subsequent agreement or agreements.

Motion to approve second discussion.

Oh I'm sorry, was that not my okay?

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 760, please say aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 761.

Resolution further amending resolution 857 of 2023.

Effective December 27, 2023 is amended and titled.

Resolution adopting and approving the 2024 capital budget, the proposed 2024 community development program, and the 2024 through 2029 capital improvement program by reducing 31st war community action group by 10,000 and increasing Lincoln Place Presbyterian Church by 10,000 and authorize a subsequent agreement or agreements.

Motion to approve.

Second discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 761, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 762.

Resolution amending resolution 863, effective January 1, 2019, entitled Resolution Adopting and Approving the 2019 Capital Budget and the 2019 Community Development Block Grant Program.

And the 2019 through 2024 Capital Improvement Program by amending various line items in anticipation of the pending eight-year U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development Funding Clawback deadline.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Second discussion.

Discussion.

Thank you.

Are these in a particular are these like PSG in a particular district?

Because I have one on the agenda.

Does anyone know which one this is?

It doesn't say in the title.

Um what it is, and I don't have the text file in front of me.

Because it says like various line items, right?

And so which um which need like program or neighborhood or community organization?

Oh my well, okay.

Yeah.

I just really needed the text file.

AJ Miller program supervisor community development.

Mike or Mike, Fiscal and Contracting Supervisor Community Development.

I was actually asking a question of Madam Clerk.

So I'm sorry, did they uh did someone invite you guys all up?

Because they didn't need to bother you.

Just assume.

So that's okay.

Next time you have to, yeah, someone has to like beckon you is our rules, but that's okay.

Um do you have the line items in front of you or the just the tech?

What does like the text of the bill read?

I will tell you it's not public service grants.

Yeah.

Um, it is the 760.

Uh I got it.

This is a lot of stuff from the Capitol budget.

Um CDBG personnel complete.

Um, do you want the line item amounts to?

Well, yeah, yeah.

Okay.

I mean, I is it very long or okay, yeah.

All right.

CDBG personnel uh plus three thirty complete streets minus twenty-seven thousand seven seventy-one and twenty-six cents.

Facility improvements decreased by one thousand one hundred and forty-five dollars and sixty-six cents.

Uh fair housing, uh minus three hundred and sixty-five dollars.

Neighborhood and economic development, minus five thousand nine hundred and forty-four dollars and seventy-three cents.

Play area improvements, minus six hundred and fifty-seven dollars and fifty-two cents.

Play area improvements again, minus five thousand three seventeen.

St.

Andrews Lutheran Church, minus twenty-one cents.

And then the money will be transferred to CDBE administration plus forty-one thousand one ninety-eight oh eight plus the three dollars and thirty cents from the CDBG personnel I mentioned earlier.

Okay, and I thank you to Madam Clark.

Actually, who just like literally gave me the piece of paper, so I appreciate that.

Um, so these are like the 2020 18 2019 allocations.

Yes, ma'am.

That are being so they didn't get expended like the neighborhood traffic calming.

There was 30,000 CDB, do you think it expended?

That's kind of amazing.

We spend so much money on traffic calming, and then we or till we run out.

Um do you know if that one was for like a specific project that got changed or didn't department just could not spend it.

These amounts are all amounts that couldn't be spent.

But you don't know what the which traffic calming project was it?

I'd have to dig it, but not for the gosh, we blow through that money and we violated like so much more.

I'm just surprised.

Okay, so and then so we're increasing the C D BG administration, which we're going to assume would loosen up money from another budget year for C D BG administration, like for this year.

I I wouldn't necessarily say that.

The thing is we're up against the deadline and we have to spend the money.

Yeah, sure, sure.

So we're, you know, sometimes we swap the money out.

So that's fine.

But like we we did it, did we not fully fund your department this year?

We are fully defunded, but I'm gonna turn to Michael, who's our fiscal and contracting supervisor, who can explain it just a little bit better than I can.

So that's the that's the exact right thing to do.

If they're I don't know why they're all up in the sky.

Not a problem.

Uh so the funds that are being reallocated to CDBG admin uh wouldn't necessarily be uh benefit in our department per se.

Those funds in return would be um converted over to pay off our indirect cost to the city of Pittsburgh.

So all the funds that Kelly just mentioned and that you see on those uh documents will then be transferred over to the City of Pittsburgh's uh indirect cost line item, which we um pay into every year to cover cover the cost of services and okay, but doesn't it loosen up some 2026 CDBG because we were gonna use that instead?

I mean, hypothetically it could be a good thing.

Okay, but we're not sure yet.

Yeah, basically.

Yes.

Okay, okay.

We can follow up on that.

Thank you.

I appreciate that.

And I do probably since you're already here, um, I'll maybe ask.

I was gonna hold the CDBG line items that you were the the next the two bills, um 768 and 769.

So if you want to just hang out, we'll get back to those ones.

Okay, thank you.

That's all I have, Madam Chair.

Sorry.

Further discussion on bill seven hundred two.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 762, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 763.

Resolution authorizing the mayor and the director of the Office of Management and Budget to enter into an agreement or agreements with agencies to provide supportive services related to the home ARP program for a total not to exceed amount of 105,820 and 37 cent over four years.

Motion to approve discussion.

Second discussion.

Okay, first I do have a question about this bill, but uh first there's an amendment that you all have yellow paper related to bill seven sixty-three.

Uh entry work.

So motion to amend bill seven sixty-three.

Second discussion.

This was at the request of OMB, correct?

Mm-hmm.

Yes.

Sorry, I thought I get seeing no discussion.

All those in favor of amending Bill 763, please say aye.

Aye.

All right.

Bill is amended.

Any further discussion?

Yeah.

I just had a question.

What what center is this?

What center?

Is this related to any particular center?

Oh, no, no, it's not related to any per uh particular center.

Uh we're having oberly is going to be doing um handling part of with home ALP either of those four qualified populations.

Um part of it will go through the link, which is a bill that's under Councilman Mosley.

The other part is the other part is to have Auberley handle two of the qualified populations that the link can do.

So they'll be doing administrative work, which includes some case management, referral services.

Okay, so Auberley, where's Auberley located?

Uh their main location is out in uh of course McKeesport, but we do fund Auberley for our ESG program, and they'll also be working with the home ARP program with the one of the locations at 800 pen and 2099 Street.

Okay, so this is for A Ninth Street.

Well, not just for that location, it's with a different programs that have getting affordable housing.

So there are different programs that are going to get money through the home ARP program.

One is 800 pen 209th Street.

There's one that's action housing, has a program with Bethlehem Haven.

Oh give me one second.

Um the May building, which is also in downtown.

And that's where there's one more project that's within the city.

All the projects are within the city limits, though, if that's what you're concerned about.

Okay.

All right.

I know there's a one up in Arlington.

So if there Oh, that that is another program we're working with Auberley.

That is the supportive service, not excuse me, not supportive services.

That is the non-congregate shelter program.

That is the non-congregate shelter program actually it's more of the affordable housing but we'll be working with Aubrey on that program too.

Okay is that related to this bill uh no that is not related to this all right thanks to any programs.

Further discussion the bill is amended seeing none all in favor of Bill 763 please say aye.

Affirmative recommendation Bill 768.

Resolution further amending resolution 840 of 2019 effective January 1, 2020 is amended entitled resolution adopting and approving the 2020 capital budget and the 2020 community development block grant program and the 2020 through 2025 capital improvement program by reducing various organizations broadjust and various line items funded by the community development block grant in program year 2020 and to authorize subsequent agreements.

Motion to approve second second and we could read the next bill with it if you don't mind Bill 769 resolution further amending resolution 647 of 2020 effective December 23rd 2020 is amended and titled resolution adopting and approving the 2021 capital budget and the 2021 community development block grant program and the 2021 through 2026 capital improvement program so as to identify specific public service grant projects in council district seven and authorize a subsequent agreement or agreements for operation administrative expenses maintenance purchase of equipment and or rehabilitation of neighborhood facilities on behalf of the residents of the city of Pittsburgh.

Motion to approve second discussion actually I'm gonna motion uh in a minute to hold both of these bills because I want to thank C VG for helping us both the organizations that have been struggling to meet their deadlines helping uh and working together to help them actually get in all of the paperwork because it's really burdensome if everyone I'm sure has noticed for the community organizations.

And then also could you explain kind of like what you told my staff this week so I'm not sure I had eyes on it something that like the old dollars can only be moved to 2026 grantees or something like that.

Yes so um as probably you are all aware we have been working over the past couple years to just make our program increasingly compliant and audit proof because all of these federal funds are under so much scrutiny and so much attempts to you know find excuses to not give them to cities.

So we are um to that effect any time we have to reprogram public service grant funds that were not spent we are asking that they go to a group that has an active application because some of these funds are from five or six years ago and there's a really good chance that the program that they were applied for or that if an organization applied in years past they might not still be running that program.

They might have not have this money accounted for in this but in their budget and since these are reimbursement grants it's really important that they have the plan set to go so that they can spend the money and then be reimbursed.

And additionally if they are going to an applicant that has been vetted we know that they have an eligible application because we get so many applications that just don't fit within the strict guidelines of C BG.

So there's like a list that your office has of like the the applic the current applicants that were you've already vetted to be eligible.

Yes so that is the list of all eligible applicants that goes out um once the application period closes I sent it out to the chiefs of staff um and it was all of our eligible 2026 applicants once I got all of those then we had gone through our records and found money that had been sitting for our you know three or five year span groups that had relinquished funds things like that and I sent a follow-up email and said these are additional funds that can be allocated the majority of them were below the $10,000 minimum so best practice is to just add them to a contract that's coming in because less than $10,000 is not worth the that burdensome paperwork for pretty much any organization.

I guess though so again since I'm I'm holding these so we can figure out which one works which ones are the eligible projects in my district.

So hypothetically though if we assemble like the $10,000 level that you all prefer we get to then that could be a project instead of one that already has 10,000 and then you're gonna add another five to it which is I think kind of what your initial suggestion was but you know there may be other projects that did you know didn't you know we couldn't assemble 10,000 for that maybe now we could if there is additional funding to get that 10,000 then yes.

Okay.

Um like you would could then fund six groups in your uh from your 2026 applicate pool.

Yeah.

Gotcha.

Okay.

All right.

So thank you I appreciate the help.

That's all I've got, Madam Chair.

Thank you.

No further discussion.

Was there a motion that we were expecting to I didn't actually motion to hold it I so um I'll just say motion to hold like if I even do like three weeks it gets us you know it's after recess so we have plenty of time to work it out.

Okay.

Thank you.

Motion to hold three weeks.

Second discussion seeing none all in favor of holding bills 768 and 769 for three weeks please say aye.

Aye aye.

Bills will be held Bill 771 ordinance amending the Pittsburgh code of ordinances title five traffic article seven parking chapter 541 general parking regulations.

Section 54102 prohibitions in specified places to remove language providing an exception to parking prohibitions for the protection of a vehicle.

Motion to approve discussion second discussion thank you I was going to say several years back I think maybe it was like three years ago I introduced a bill that added into the code that um you weren't allowed to park a vehicle in a bike lane there was a so that was implemented but then there were further language that sorry there was previous language that was already in there that said um like like basically gave a loophole uh for people to take it to court and say hey I was parking on the bike lane because I was protecting my vehicle or I was parking on the sidewalk because I was protecting my vehicle so um I know that that's what was given that was reported back to me several times and so in and working with um bike Pittsburgh who I worked previously on on this bill with uh we're gonna we're attempting to remove that language uh from the from the from the code is a good enough explanation you further discussion Councilmember Warwick yes so just to clarify so if someone was parking on the sidewalk they could get ticketed and and it's so you're saying that was something in court they were going to court and saying oh so like my so that my whatever side mirror doesn't get hit I was parking on the sidewalk interrogatory yeah I don't know exactly what yeah what was said but um it was you know the line well so just to answer your first part was you know on a sidewalk it was there's actually a whole list of uh it's could be like in our intersection uh sidewalk bike lane and bike lane was the one that we added there's like there's like ten different you know ways that someone could be uh given a ticket for this but um so we added the bike lane one so yes yes to that uh and and also several other um ways you could you know put a vehicle in the in the right of way and then um and that's your the second part like I don't know the act exact specific like reason the the defendant gave but the reason the the judge has been hesitant to rule or officers were hesitant to to give the ticket was because there was that language that said or to protect or a vehicle like or for the safety of the vehicle so I think it was something actually was that C sorry I'm not sure if you're auditory.

Yeah no yeah that that's great I fully supportive I don't you know anti-car.

Although we agree alas any further discussion I'm just going to kill some time while we're waiting for a clerk.

I think this is um this is really great legislation I'm glad that you've like seen this play out in court and then learned that we actually need an ordinance change to be able to make this defensible in the courts um have I guess I'm opening at can of worms with this question but have we have we discussed enforcement have you have you contemplated enforcement or what might be the potential now that we have so many changes that have happened both with regard to ticket by mail and parking authority part partnering more closely with Domi and you know all of our potential there.

If you don't have an answer today that's fine.

I'm curious though what the conversation's been yeah I I think it's been going really well actually from the parking authority side we I mean there's hundreds of tickets that have been given for people that I'm parking in a bike lane.

We I mean there's hundreds of tickets that have been given for people that are parking in a bike lane.

So I think this is uh would further enforce that.

Uh and just to clarify, like the language that we're taking out.

I just want to read if you're okay, I will just read the paragraph real quick.

Except when necessary to avoid conflict with other traffic or to protect the safety of any person or a vehicle.

And that's the one we're the language we're taking out, or in compliance with law or the directions of a police officer or official traffic control device, no operator of a vehicle shall and no owner of vehicle shall allow the vehicle to and then you know park in a bike lane part that there's all this list of everything.

So that's it.

So yeah, yeah, for the enforcement though.

Yeah, yeah.

I think it's been going well from the parking authority side.

Um I don't have good data on like you know, from the city side, but um, I know this was really to get you know the parking originally was like the parking authority could be doing this.

And you know, being on the parking authority board, it was like let's let's do this, and then the parking authority could implement ticket, you know, ticketing in the bike lane.

And and that's that's been accomplished, and this would further accomplish that.

Mm-hmm.

Mm-hmm.

Okay.

Um you just was thinking about we've this long-standing debate around um enforcement around parking on sidewalks, where there probably needs to be a different approach.

Uh maybe uh a smaller approach and then sort of a expanded approach for enforcement of parking on sidewalks because it's just a different it's very dependent on I mean we can be black and white about it, but the reality in the world is that it's very dependent on sort of like narrowness of the street and alternatives to parking and alternatives to you know, honestly, like non non-vehicle um transportation throughout the city, but certainly don't have to get in that conversation today.

But I've heard a lot of ideas for uh starting around certain areas like hospitals and rec centers and other areas and then sort of expanding out to the rest of the city from there from our disability rights community in walk Pittsburgh.

It would strengthen uh parking on or strengthen any one of the several uh uh you know, railroad tracks, I mean there's a lot of different on a crosswalk.

It would strengthen all of that on a sidewalk is on a sidewalk, except that a pedicle may be parked as provided in the vehicle, like you know, so on a sidewalk is in there.

So it would strengthen all of that.

The whole list of bike lanes.

It would strengthen the whole list.

Yeah.

Yeah.

So Councilmember Warwick.

Oh, okay.

Um so we can proceed to the vote, sorry.

Can I just say that's I thought about I thought about like what's okay, like I guess there could be some instances where you're I don't know, could be a car crash, could be something where you're like, okay, my vehicle is not a safe area.

I think if you are in that unfortunate moment, then you would take it to the court and then say the the literally the emergency that happened, and I think there will be a good discussion around um you know why it wouldn't be appropriate to be you know for this to be enforced upon that person.

You know, so I I think overall this is the direction we need to go.

So uh that's why I thought this was the right thing to do.

Thank you.

Councilman Calcom.

Thank you, madam chair.

Um interrogatory, please, with Councilman Wilson?

Yes.

So um let me ask you this, Councilman.

Is this uh what's this do for me?

Like for instance, I got a phone call yesterday.

Um person lives on a street in Beachview, and they're continually always you know, it's one thing when you put one tower up on the sidewalk, but they're you know, people are abusing it, they're blocking the sidewalk.

If you're in a wheelchair, you can't get by baby stroller, you have to go out in the street, even kids walking by just to go to school, they have to walk out in the street.

I've always been told, like, you know, if you call one in to site, I guess, they cite the whole street, basically, you know, and then you kind of you know, everybody's like all up in arms because they've been doing this for years, and so um will this help enforce that for me or you know, and again, sometimes I hesitate to enforce it because I don't want to ticket the whole street.

I'd like to put out a warning actually and say, look, we're gonna be citing this in the near future.

Kind of this so we don't burden them all with a fine right away, but we let them know moving forward we want you off the curb.

Yeah, I d I do I do think that I do not I do not let me say I do not like parking on a sidewalk.

So I like to literally don't park on a sidewalk anywhere I go.

Right.

Just to example, you're setting a good idea.

Worry about someone taking a picture of that, you know.

Working with you don't like that.

You say you don't like that.

Yeah, I do not like that.

I there's a street in my I drive down every day and I mean I've uh that they do that and we never used to do that, and so it's like, you know, I'm like that Yinzer person saying like we always waited for each other, like we never parked on the sidewalk.

Now there's like two-way traffic, it's just so fast.

Uh I mean we we've tried to implement like I've worked with Domi where we put in eight inch curbs so people can't like they feel totally uncomfortable parking on a sidewalk.

I I've done and f you know, try to do enforcement as well.

Um and you know, for any for like basically, you know, did like kind of like a like a preliminary citation, like just to kind of scare people from not doing it, you know.

But I have seen several tickets being given out just because luck.

Yeah.

I've seen the whole thing.

I've seen the whole bill.

Right.

You can't just call in one car.

So I think it's a very large issue in the city of Pittsburgh, especially for streets that are not developed in a in a way to support um you know, to I don't know whether it's all traffic buses and to meet on top of that uh f fire fi uh fire um well you gotta turn a street one way in the fire.

I think it's very comprehensive.

If I had to put this in one thing, like move them forward, but I mean I think there's some pretty blatant, you know, situations and I would love to work with Domi with anyone on a very comprehensive, like, you know, if one can't one car can't get past I don't I don't know.

I don't even I don't I don't even try and like pontificate right now.

I just want to say I I'm willing to work with anyone that wants to work on something very comprehensive and actually get enforcement um appropriately throughout the whole city of Pittsburgh because I think it's I just it it's my big pet peeve.

I can't stand on top of me not wanting to like cite everybody on the street and upsetting everyone.

Um and I do agree, I I I want them off the sidewalk.

Um I want to be able to get around.

Um, you know, if you're whether it's a baby carriage or a wheelchair or you can just a kid walking to school.

But on top of that, now I have a lot of streets in um you know, my district I think has the most motor vehicles in any other district per two per household on average.

Well you don't allow bike lanes in your district.

Well, yeah, no, there's no room for them.

So you know, we have two per and now so now if we start ticketing them and they start moving onto the street and doing abiding the law, here's the problem I have now.

Ambulances and fire engines, as you mentioned, can't get by now.

So, you know, you either have to make the street one way, um, you know, so so it's uh it's a problem, I will tell you.

I want to enforce them to be off the sidewalk and I just want to put a warning out and let them know, hey, this is what's gonna happen.

And again, you risk they all now parking in the street conforming to our laws, and does that mean uh fire engine can't get through and questionable your life, so it's difficult.

So um so any enforcement, I I I like to see obviously we have to be uh thoughtful as to you know what's that mean if we narrow the street where you can barely get by now because I have a lot of streets that are so tight you can get by just on one when on one side of the street, let alone both.

Yeah, I mean if you're parking on a sidewalk and a wheelchair can get past and there's houses on that street, you're doing the wrong thing.

Absolutely.

You're doing the wrong thing.

Absolutely.

You need to park somewhere else.

Yep.

Yep.

Okay, well, we're on the same page.

How to solve it?

Uh I'm not quite sure, but yeah.

Yeah.

For my part, I'll just say I agree.

It has to be like a its own separate conversation, probably over like the period of a year, working with the smart people of some of the advocacy organizations that think about this all the time, right?

That have the ideas and um and could could demonstrate different ways that we could go about starting this.

But that's all I'll say.

I think it's a really, really big problem, and the solution's not gonna be easy.

So uh okay.

All those in favor of let's see.

Um all those in favor of Bill 771, please say I.

Affirmative recommendation.

We've already covered Bill 773, so we'll move on to innovation performance asset management and technology committee.

Bill 745 resolution providing for the issuance of a warrant in favor of MUSCO sports lighting in the amount of 73,000 fifty dollars for the purpose of the software package for the digital control of lighting in all ball fields and parks and providing for the payment of the cost thereof.

Motion to approve.

Discussion.

Seeing none.

All those in favor of bill actually let me just say.

Yeah, because are you able to answer the question?

Or the question about the bill.

Yep.

Okay.

Hi Don.

Good.

Public works.

Thanks for being here.

No.

Okay, because I was familiar with it can be controlled from somewhere else.

Yeah.

This is the same thing.

This is always the company.

We actually have had this capability for quite some time.

Okay.

So there's two separate just to be clear for the public, right?

There's two separate systems.

There's the push button where if it's just a basketball court or it's not rented, that push button will turn them on, right?

It's timed and then they turn off after a certain time and they push the button again.

What this is when a field is permitted, or like you were saying, when the field is permitted or anything, that it could be pre-programmed to turn on and off during the time of the permit.

Also it the uh people like you know Keith and Joe Rush, the superintendents of parks can go on their phone and turn lights on and off.

Is there a time when uh the lights absolutely should not be on?

Like after 11 or something.

Uh you know, off the top of my head, my answer is there is a night sky ordinance throughout the city.

So I do know that uh Moscow does work with that, like when we put in new systems, that's a consideration.

So if it's a newer system, it's going to yes.

Okay, I just want to make sure it's a general rule that they're implementing because I've actually I've actually had the in the past I've called Horn called Director Hornsy, it was like hey, ball field lights were still on at midnight.

Yeah, well, there's times I can say comes into the house.

It depends, right?

Because uh the reason I say it depends, and it's because I haven't been this involved in the operations for a while, you know.

Uh but I I don't know if every actual park in the system has Moscow Bolt and lighting.

Right?

So if there still are old.

But Moscow is the system.

Yeah, but Moscow is the only company that we have this contract.

Like that's that can do it remotely.

They do not have to do that.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Because we we get our they uh they are our preferred uh the standardized equipment.

They're our preferred provider.

Great.

Councilman Cockell.

Thank you, madam chair.

Uh hi, Donnie.

Hi.

Uh is this related in any way to I have a person who sent an email and has been complaining about bright lights on Shelton here from Brookline.

Shelton Avenue.

And I'm thinking that's new LED lighting, I guess.

Yeah, I'm like, oh my god, I think we gotta get a truck out there to change all the bulbs.

And they're like finally, uh, you know, she got through 311.

She got them to just kind of dim it down.

There's a little switches.

No, this is kind of the same.

But different same church, different pews.

Because what you're talking about is controlled by Domi.

Okay.

That's the art that they've been doing was setting up the live traffic division and stuff like that.

Um because that's on the street, right?

So street lights doming, and then the park stuff is is jailing to be able to do that.

She was close to the business district, but that wasn't it.

It was just the it wasn't it wasn't just because it was that right down the street towards you know, yeah, residential, more quiet, yeah.

Still very bright bright.

I'm old enough to be around long enough in this place that we were talking about that you know that was the goal of the traffic division, right?

Was to have that capability and I think they're on they're there if not on their way there.

I don't know, different department.

But you know, if if there was police activity, we could raise the lights, you know, and there was all you know all of those.

I was very pleased.

Um you know, again, I know I was like, I could know we're gonna get trucks out there and change the bulbs and do K light and whatever.

I said, Oh my god.

Kudos to Domingue.

It's very good.

That's um, yeah, yeah, work worked beautifully.

It just toned it down, everything's good.

So okay, unrelated, but still operated by the city.

Yep.

Yep, for short.

Interesting.

Yeah.

I used to have to be home when the street lights can't go on.

That's all right.

I know.

Right.

Thank you.

All right.

All those in favor of bill seven forty-five, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Thank you.

Okay.

Yeah.

Uh that moves us to our final committee of the day, intergovernmental and educational affairs committee chaired by Councilman Mosley.

Bill 746 resolution providing for a professional services agreement and or contract with Buchanan, Ingersoll, and Rooney PC for professional consulting services for federal government affairs and legislative services and providing for the payment thereof, cost not to exceed 302,400 over four years.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion?

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 746, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 747.

Resolution authorizing the mayor, director of the Office of Management and Budget on behalf of the City of Pittsburgh to enter into a cooperation agreement with Allegheny County Economic Development, Allegheny County Department of Human Services, and the Urban Redevelopment Authority to collaboratively manage coordinated entry services related to the home ARP program at no cost to the city.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 747, please say aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 748.

Resolution authorizing the issuance of a warrant payable in favor of Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission for the first of two installments for the 2026 annual membership dues and an amount not to exceed $64,373.50.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 748, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 749.

Resolution adopting plan revision to the City of Pittsburgh's official sewage facilities plan for 2039 Broadhead Fording Road at no cost to the city.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none.

All in favor of Bill 749, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Final bill of the day, Bill 751.

We didn't read 750.

I'm sorry.

Bill 750.

Resolution providing for an amended reimbursement agreement or agreements with Pittsburgh Water for costs associated with the raise grant project where Pittsburgh Water will be responsible for paying 100% of the actual expenses involved in certain work to be described in the agreement and an amount not to exceed 100,000, an increase of $50,000 from the previously authorized agreement.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 750, please say aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 751.

Resolution approving execution of a contract for disposition by sale of land between the Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh and MK Liberty Partners LLC or related entity for the sub-block 1D, lot 130 183 in the second ward of the city of Pittsburgh, 604 Liberty Avenue District 1 at no cost to the city.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none.

All in favor of Bill 751, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

That exhaust our meeting agenda.

There are meeting announcements.

See here.

Well, we're looking for that.

Is there anything from members?

Seeing nothing.

So a meeting announcements next week.

Council will hold meet Monday, August 3rd at 10 a.m.

for their last regular meeting before recess.

Speaker registration will close at 9 a.m.

Monday morning.

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 four one two five five two one three by the applicable registration deadline.

Also on Monday with sessions at one thirty P.M.

and two thirty PM, Council will hold a briefing on the city's comprehensive plan.

With that, I will take a motion to excuse the absent member, approve the minutes and adjourn the meeting.

All in favor?

Aye.

Meeting is adjourned.