Cable Advisory Committee - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon and welcome to Pittsburgh City Council's cablecast post agenda on Pittsburgh's noise ordinance as it relates to restaurants and bars for May 28, 2026. And for the record, we're joined in person today by Councilperson Bob Sharland and online by Councilwoman Deb Gross and Councilman Bobby Wilson. And I'm sure we'll see other council members join shortly. So I want to thank everyone for joining us and we are here today because Pittsburgh's small businesses, bars, breweries, music venues, and restaurants are currently operating under a state-enforced noise ordinance that does not work and which cost these businesses significant time, money, and goodwill with their neighbors. For years, these industries enjoyed a normal 75 decibel limit for sound that escaped their property. This made sense because when our neighbors congregate to enjoy a meal, cocktail, or listen to a local band, conversations and music inevitably create noise. However, a few years ago, Allegheny County and Philadelphia were specifically prohibited by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania from having any sound above zero decibels emanating from these types of properties. Unlike Allegheny County in Philadelphia, every other county in the Commonwealth enjoys a 75 decibel level exception that recognizes the practical realities of running a venue. The result here at home is a complaint-driven anonymous enforcement process that has left operators facing repeat citations, mounting legal costs, and in some cases, the decision to give up live programming altogether, while residents wait months for resolution and see little improvement on the ground. So the bottom line is, the current framework is not serving our operators, it's not serving our neighbors, and it's not serving the city. Today's conversation is really just about understanding the problem in concrete terms from the people living it and learning from state officials and law enforcement leaders joining us today who administer the current system, charting a responsible path toward local framework that is fair, predictable, and worthy of the communities that it serves. And so I am so thrilled to welcome our guests today. We're going to take this in two different panel discussions because we have a lot of invited guests and a lot of experts in their field joining us today. So on our first panel panel, I'm happy to welcome our Pittsburgh Bureau of Police Chief Jason Landau. We have Lynn Davies, the Executive Director of the Liquor Control Committee in the Pennsylvania House. We have State Representative Lindsay Powell. And we have Sergeant Andrew Robinson. And then we will start and we have Allison Harnden, our nighttime economy manager. So we'll start with this panel and then move to our next panel, which is a little bit more of the expertise from the operators of and managers and owners of our entertainment industries and our small businesses. So with that, I would love to actually we can just move right down the line if that's easiest. Each person can introduce themselves. If you have introductory remarks prepared, that's fine. I'm going to ask us to keep it under five minutes just for the sake of time. And if you don't, that's fine. You can just introduce yourself with your name and your title and experience on this topic.

Sergeant Andrew Robinson, Zen 3 Police. I worked Southside Entertainment Patrol for two years.

Jason Lando recently returned to Pittsburgh as the chief of police previously with the department for 21 years and was gone for the past five years. So still getting caught up on some of the issues and concerns. And I think Sergeant Robinson for helping out with that today.

State Representative Lindsay Powell, thank you so much, Councilperson, for hosting this post-agenda. This has been something that's been incredibly important to our district. I have the honor of representing the 21st District, which includes Lawrenceville, the Strip District, Shaler, Mobile, Aetna, Reserve Township, and parts of the north side. And we have some wonderful, vibrant parts of the city that have a density of bars and restaurants that are nestled in our neighborhoods. And so we've really struggled with the challenge of balancing making sure that we have habitable neighborhoods where people can put their babies to bed nice and easy on a Sunday night, but also we have vibrant bars and restaurants that people want to patron. So thank you for taking up this important issue and excited to delve a little deeper into this challenging topic.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. Lynn Banka-Davies. I'm the executive director of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives Liquor Control Committee. And thank you for inviting me. And hopefully I can help provide a little insight into how we got here with regards to the laws and legislation and the complexity of the liquor code. Thank you.

Hello, thank you for having us here today, all of us. I'm Allison Harnden, Nighttime Economy Manager for the City of Pittsburgh. We are located, the Office of Nighttime Economy is two people located in the Public Safety Department and we're responsible for being a liaison for food, beverage, entertainment businesses and the communities where they operate. So this is an important subject for us to dive into because we see a lot of stress on both sides with residents and businesses. Our role is to help create a sociable city and one that can have peaceful coexistence with residents and businesses, but also be equitable. And the current, I want to be clear that I don't think that people are not doing their job. It's just they're operating in a structure that has a lot of flaws. And I think that we can have what we're looking for as we figure out where the bugs are and find a path forward. Thanks.

Thank you all so much. And so we were covertly measuring the decibel levels of this opening conversation. Not really covertly. The sound noise meter was here. And just to give a sense of what 75 decibel levels is, right now we're at about 69, 68, 69. 75 is not that much louder than what we're currently talking, the levels we're currently having a regular conversation. Yes, there's some amplification here, but just wanted to sort of level set what 75 decibels sounds like to the average ear close-up. All right, so we'll start in with some questions. I do want to, since we don't have formal presentations, I would normally ask for a presentation and then open up to my colleagues. I'm gonna start the conversation off, if that's okay, with a few questions for each guest here, open it up to my council colleagues for some generative conversation and questions, and then we'll move to panel number two as well. So we'll start with State Rep. Powell. From your conversations with operators and businesses, have noise complaints filed with the Bureau of Liquor Control Enforcement increased since the General Assembly approved the recent changes to the noise provisions? Do you know? Or Lynn, if you're able to answer that as well.

I don't actually. I do have some data that I received from the Bureau of Liquor Control Enforcement. It's been pretty consistent, approximately 10 noise citations yearly. Some of those are actually outside the city of Pittsburgh. But no, it doesn't. And just to clarify, when the... law changed the law previously for everybody was always that you could not hear off the license premise so the change gave that latitude to other counties that it set the decibel range there was no decibel range previously it was just if you were standing outside a licensed prevalent even if you were like on the street literally right outside the door that's how that's how it always was governed and then that change happened in 2022.

Thank you, thank you. So I'm wondering if anyone can speak to what the process looks like when, and we'll ask this question to the panel number two as well, when a liquor control enforcement officer responds to a noise complaint against a bar or music venue, what criteria are they using in determining the appropriate response, whether that's a warning, citation, further escalation, what does it look like, what does it feel like?

I can respond to that. I mean, while I'm not liquor control enforcement, when they do, everything typically is complaint driven. So they're going to receive a complaint, whether it's by email or phone. They don't immediately go out. This is typically something that happens over the course of several days. They'll ask for information from the individual who calls asking what time of day are they hearing the um the noise what's the day of the week are there is it during certain events and then they will open an investigation which will typically remain open for approximately 30 days um they'll frequent the establishment during those times that they anticipate that there would be a violation and then they'll document um As far as the discretion in warnings and citations, I really couldn't answer that. There's nothing obviously in statute that dictates that. But once they, if they issue a citation, then the licensee would obviously get a notice of violation. The notice of violation then goes to the ALJ to be adjudicated. And then from there it goes to, after adjudication, the LCB is notified.

And I would just, oh, do you want to?

Oh, I would just say that the business has the opportunity to appeal that as well, and that can extend the time that this goes on, and not just, and the cost of that to the legal cost, and that the scheduling of these things get kind of backed up, and so it can be months and even years before these issues are resolved.

And I was just going to add that the burden sometimes on these small businesses as well. So there could be legal fees, legal costs associated with them either retaining a lawyer or trying to adjudicate the complaint against them. They do span months oftentimes for some folks, maybe even more than that. And so these complaints don't live in a vacuum. They do have pretty significant costs to some of these small businesses that are already working on pretty thin margins.

Just turning to our police, so Chief Landau and Sergeant Robinson, whoever would like to take this, what are the current policies and procedures for governing how our Bureau responds to noise complaints, particularly with those involving licensed establishments?

I'll start. There's a difference between the residential complaints and the business complaints. We have the ability to take enforcement action if there's loud noise coming from a residential area, but as it relates to bars and restaurants and other businesses, we do not. Sergeant Robbins is pretty much our expert in the south side flats with some of the bars and the businesses down there. I'll let him speak to how that how those complaints would be addressed, but there is a difference between the residential and the businesses.

So whenever there's music coming from a licensed establishment in the Southside Flats area on Carson Street, if it's not too loud and it's manageable, we kind of let it go. But if there is a, if I can hear it a half a block away, then we have to address that with the bar owners or the management and tell them, hey, you gotta turn the music down a little bit. I can hear it down the street. If I can hear it down the street, that means the neighbors on the other side of you in either direction can hear it as well. So we have to be good neighbors to each other and make sure that you're not disturbing the peace of residential.

people and then I guess I'll pose this to you and to to Allison are there practices that you found on the south side or sort throughout the city that have allowed bars and music venues to work effectively with neighbors to mitigate these concerns while preserving their ability to operate any success stories you found

it's difficult because I think the system allows it to go on for so long that people are there it's really it continues to fester between the parties and so there isn't a real desire to come together and work things out because you know from the residents perspective they are getting not getting relief and I think I think what's really confusing is maybe even to our entire group here is that Two businesses could be operating almost exactly the same, having music, being a restaurant, but the one that has a liquor license, they could be right next to each other, the one that has a liquor license is enforced by the state and the standard is zero. The decibel is zero. You cannot hear, you're not allowed to have any noise, amplified noise heard at the property line. The one that doesn't have a liquor license, then the city can go and cite them under our city code. So it's really confusing to residents who don't know the difference. They may not even go to those restaurants to know whether they have a liquor license. So they're calling in and thinking that it is the city's job to do this, whereas hands are tied. It's in the state hands. Okay.

Well, I want to give the opportunity for my colleagues to ask questions, share their concerns, share their observations from their own experiences in their neighborhoods, and we can round it out after that. But in person, we have Councilperson Bob Charland, who also represents the South Side and has experience there, among many other places throughout your district. So I'll turn it over to you, Councilperson.

Well, thank you for calling us today. I want to start off by asking Allison, you're kind of, you know, you're an expert in this field, you know, very much tied in with a national network of folks that really know this well. Who do you think is doing, like what other municipalities, be it in Pennsylvania or beyond Pennsylvania, that are doing this well?

I think everybody has pieces of it that are well, but I think something to think about is that when we get to enforcement, we're already kind of losing. We should be doing a lot more work up front. That's sort of what our office tries to do. One thing we do on Mondays is look at all the 311 complaints to see what is rising to the top, not just the businesses, but we're two people for the whole city, so we're looking for patterns that we can, intercept and maybe do an intervention somehow, create some sort of tool that might help the business and the residents do a better job. So in terms of who's doing a good job, I think there's before you get to enforcement, there's preventing, there's education, pre-planning, like we're doing with the comp plan. Maybe some of that could feed into it. There's mitigation opportunities, like in New Orleans, they have a program that they're doing, which is working with the university to come up with and to work at a university that has an audio engineering program. And they have grants that go to the businesses to work with them and get to kind of the actual business is a problem, the building itself. We have a lot of old properties here. So what can we do to prevent that? That's another strategy. In New York, when things get really bad, they created this program during COVID. It's called MEND. It's Mediating Entertainment Neighborhood Disputes. And so it's a requirement that if you're going to go to this level of trying to shut down a business, this has to go through a mediation first. But I think part of it too is where we are placing enforcement of sound. I mean, enforcement of sound is not a crime. It's not a danger to our safety. And it shouldn't be necessarily, in my opinion, and this is what other cities and states think too, not necessarily in the hands of police. So a lot of cities have a code enforcement unit. and they go out in nights and weekends, and they're proactive. It doesn't have to just be sound in entertainment districts. We have a lot of quality of life codes that could be enforced, not just nine to five, but I mean, that's a part of our office is finding equity in night and not just nightlife. So part of that is people deserve to have the same equal opportunities response from the city. In Seattle, a lot of cities have entertainment permits, which allows them to tie any sort of response to that permit, so that it gives the city more authority to provide these kind of tools. The code enforcement units, there's a lot of national organizations and state organizations that then provide training in audio and sound management. I've delved into this a lot. Sound has a wacky science. We were getting complaints some time ago, I think it was before COVID, from Stage AE all the way in Crafton. And so I was like, how does this happen? And it's like, well, first of all, water carries sound waves. And so that was doing it. And when it hits a mountain, it can go up. It will actually separate and come back together. over the mountain, the sound waves. So this is like just, you know, we need to know better about how we help our businesses, you know, be sound, not soundproof, but at least help them maintain the sound. San Francisco has an entertainment commission, and they meet with people that want to have amplified sound recognizing that every business and their building is different, they go in and help set settings for the sound inside the building to know that this is it. If you go past this, you're going to go past the decibel reading outside the business. So there are a lot of opportunities. There's not one city that is best at it, but I think there's a lot of people that have good pieces.

That's helpful. So I guess... I don't really know. Maybe this is a better question for the next panel. But I just kind of want to know from your perspective, because we really don't do much sound enforcement in the city. We really don't do it well. And I know it's really challenging for us to get liquor control enforcement to come around at all. It doesn't happen very often. I kind of want to know what... What do we think is lost by not having good policies around this? What do we think we're losing? Between businesses and our cultural centers, what is it that we lose?

Well, I do hear from businesses that they have decided to remove programming, so that's concerning. You know, when we hear from Visit Pittsburgh, why don't we have more music venues? I mean, they do surveys of visitors, and they're like, well, why don't you have more music downtown? I do believe there's a, you know, a reticence by businesses to... to have any sort of entertainment. And we're not just talking music. We're talking trivia nights, drag shows. Even a TV showing the Steelers game can be in violation of the liquor license. But who's calling and complaining that the Steelers game on the bar? So then it becomes like we are actually not equitably enforcing if we're choosing what music, what type of entertainment we're enforcing against. So that, and because that's complaint-driven and in the hands of the state, we don't have as much opportunity to really solve our own problems and make sure that we're providing great spaces for people to nurture their talent and become, you know, not having those spaces to provide that creative expression is a great loss to the community. And when we started talking to businesses and resident groups and communities about this, I actually was quite surprised, and they were surprised. They didn't know a lot of this. They didn't know that this was, we didn't have control over that locally. And so they were very, they were worried about what type of complaints are coming in. And a lot of the complaints were geared towards music that might have heavy bass, which you might assume because that kind of carries. But then the type of musics that have heavy bass are rap and hip-hop and different types of music with heavy bass that tend to be used by different cultures. And so we can possibly be... in some situation there where we're in trouble with creative expression and limiting that. On the surface, it seems like, oh, just turn it down, right? But when you dig in deeper, there's really a lot of I don't want to say dangerous, just, you know, risky territory to step into. And I think what I hear from the community and from the businesses, from the residents, is that they want something that is fair and they want those establishments in their community. Yeah.

If I could add to two things. One, a lot of these businesses in these bars are already, as I said, working on very thin margins. And I can tell you anecdotally, there are several bars and establishments in our district that are really considering if they can keep their doors open, largely because a lot of folks aren't drinking as much as they used to. And so a lot of our places need to rely on different, as Allison said, different types of entertainment. So you can't rely on just people enjoying a few beers and making your numbers, but you might need to add trivia and bingo and other things like that. And without the ability to do that, folks are really struggling to figure out how to keep their doors open. And I think second, there's something to be said about third spaces as well, where a lot of these establishments are places where people come together, where there are community events that are often free to the public. And they use their ability to sell alcohol, sell beer, what have you, as a way to supplement that revenue. And so without the ability to gather, especially for communities that are vulnerable, that may not have these types of spaces regularly, we're not just losing cultural assets, but we're losing, I think, really trusted, really, for some communities, sacred spaces in our neighborhoods.

And the last question I have is for public safety here. So we, again, we don't do much enforcement of this right now. Do we have the capacity for the police to, you know, enforce, use the decibel meters and actually enforce? Do we have that capacity with our police force?

So I'll just say that, you know, I want to make sure that we're, you know, good partners. But right now, You know we're in a staffing situation. It's no secret where we're trying to figure out. things to maybe offload is the wrong term but for instance like leaning on community partners to do our crisis response and you know what what are police best suited for and most needed for when we look at the priorities and and for us to take this on um would be a significant it would be a significant lift and a significant burden if you look at uh the sergeant his his team downtown on the south side excuse me down on the south side on the weekends They are just going from call to call and incident to incident, and to put this burden on them, it would be a lot, and it would probably require additional manpower, and that's just not manpower that we have right now. And I think if we were in a different place staffing-wise, you know, if this was back when I started and we had 1,100 police officers, we'd potentially be having a different conversation. But right now we have just under 800, and I just don't know how to add that to their plate.

And the officers would have to do additional training with this as well. Holding up this decimal reader, you have to be able to know how to use it. If we're out on Carson Street and standing across from a bar, Am I going to be able to get an accurate reading? Am I going to know that's an accurate reading without having the proper training? Proper training will take officers off the street for a week or two, have them go through courses, have them go through live drills. So that would put additional stress on the officer. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you very much, and I do want to recognize that you, Councilman, had held a post-agenda on independent music venues. And so we've heard already from some of our independent music venues just how thin some of these margins are and the reasons for needing to supplement even those venues with other creative partnerships and solutions. So I think of this as a continuation of that conversation that you already started. I'd like to move to Councilwoman Deb Gross, who's joining us online for some questions.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate the time. Thank you all for being here. I represent the district, including Lawrenceville. It overlaps with State Representative Powell, Bloomfield. even Polish Hill, Friendship, even parts of Cornish Side of Manhattan Park that is very densely populated, and especially the Main Street areas, you've got population density, really densely populated, like lots and lots of people per square mile right up against Business District. So this is not a new topic to the residents in District 7, nor a new topic to myself.

And I...

Definitely would say that we have experience and have come a long way. I think this is a measuring sound, but some of that has been permits, licenses, and inspections. And some of it has been, some of it's been PLI. Certainly we've come a long way. 10 years ago, we didn't even have the right equipment to measure those. And certainly the equipment's gotten better and more affordable and is more accessible to people. And also we have official city equipment.

So I have large institutions.

It's not always music venues, right? Hospitals. with a lot of equipment noise, right? Big. big HVAC-type equipment, vibrations coming off rooftops, as Sergeant said, landing in the most unexpected places, where the next-door neighbors to a large hospital aren't hearing noise, but five blocks over and around the corner, it's exceeding the decibel levels, and we had to get measurements out there, and people were hurt. measures were taken and those noise, those noise disturbances were corrected. So there is a path and I think as Alison also pointed out, sound engineers can do amazing things in pinpointing where the sources are, where the amplifications are happening and bouncing off the buildings and how that sound is landing. Most of council members Some people here at the table, our law enforcement probably knows, and my council colleagues certainly know, but maybe not everybody at the table is aware that we've been in some 30 or 40 year struggle with the outdoor police firing range, which impacts multiple neighborhoods. And the way that that sound bounces, that is a heavy lift that we wouldn't expect a small business owner to be able to do, but we're spending millions of dollars in changing the orientation of that facility, creating earthen berms, et cetera, so that it will bring down that dust level. So those are just a handful of examples. I could go on. There are lots of other things. Grocery stores, next residential areas, same thing. Figure out exactly what they... both the decibel and that kind of pitch range we're talking about, the difference between a kind of a high pitch noise and a low pitch noise and being able to isolate a specific piece of equipment, having the property owner rectify that situation and, you know, haven't gotten a complaint in 10 years. So we have, I think, we can do better in figuring out how we have different types of activities be good neighbors to each other, right? So residential and commercial areas when they're really in tight proximity, I think it is the responsibility of this body to figure out how they coexist. And so that the businesses, especially I think the burden is on the commercial businesses to be good neighbors when they're right up against a residential area. So I'm a little concerned about some of the tone that I think that I was hearing that this is, we can't figure this out or our police can't measure these sounds and so sound isn't measurable. It certainly is. And we have experience doing it and we have experience finding the solutions so that both kinds of activities can exist close together. I also want to point out, there may be someone here at this table who can answer it, if not this table, the next one. Councilwoman Strasburger, I think in your opening comments you said that the conversations at 60-some decibels that you just measured yourself here in chambers, is that right?

Yeah, it was fluctuating, but it was around the highest point, 68, 67. Okay, so 67.

So if it were twice as loud, it would be what number?

Just ask anybody at the table. 124, 134.

I can't hear anyone. Did anyone give an answer in the mic?

You're just asking what twice as loud would be of 60? 120, 130, between there.

No, it would be 77. So that was a trick question. That was a doctor. I apologize. But I didn't have a screen I should share. I think Allison mentioned that sound and decibels are weird. They are not linear. So if it was a straight line on the chart, like you have an X, Y axis, and there's just a straight line going at an angle, that would mean that you have to do double the number to be double linear. the sound. But it isn't. It's a curve that goes up. And so every 10 decibels means that the sound, it sounds twice as loud to you. So a 20 decibel difference is a quadruple level of sound. So that's an important thing to keep in perspective. So when we're saying that the law used to be 75 and that the tenor in the room was around 65, that means that that state law at 75 would have been on noise twice as loud as what was measured in chambers. So I learned this in the reverse when we spent tens of thousands of dollars doing the sound engineering to the outdoor firing range, and the neighbors saw, I think the decibels were dropping by maybe about 20 decibels, and they were like, that's crappy. That's not good enough. But in learning it in reverse, it would dramatically quiet the sound that they were actually hearing. I think it's just one of those things where we, when we learn how these things work, we can do better. So I hope that this discussion doesn't assume that residents' complaints about noise are somehow illegitimate. I would also hope that in trying to have successful venues, certainly I think everybody I represent, nobody's anti-fun, right? They choose the neighborhoods that I represent because we have such vibrant, and exciting business districts because we have such vibrant and exciting third places that almost all of the districts, not all of it, not every square inch, but many, many residents can walk to their beloved community businesses, their sacred spaces, as the representative said, and they really cherish community assets and work very hard to support those businesses, to make sure that they have customers. I'm representing Penn Avenue right now in its 20th year of construction, and we're really working to make sure those businesses get the resources they need to keep their doors open. So the business districts are incredibly important to the city residents who live near them, and I think they really go out of their way to make sure that they to help keep them alive. And so I think they're here for that conversation as well. But in lots of these cases, I think it's fair to ask both parties to be good makers. So I don't know if anyone at the table has any thoughts.

I have a little bit of a thought. So I appreciate what you said, Councilperson. I think the reason why at the state level I've taken up this issue is because it's a matter of being a good neighbor on both sides. And again, in the district, I believe the community members that I've spoken to want a resolution. The bar owners, the establishments want a resolution. And so I think we're here today trying to figure out what is the best and most efficient way to address an issue that consistently I think is frustrating and confounds us that we've got, I'll say, I think an ineffective state system that makes it entirely inequitable where as a resident you're waiting for a response for often months and you're living right next to the kind of the complaint that you've made. And then for bar owners and establishment owners, having to go through sometimes incredibly confusing and redundant policies that can be expensive, but also prohibit you from doing the type of business that you want to do. And just because I hate a gotcha question, 75 decibels, I believe, is more of a vacuum cleaner. So we're talking probably not the vacuum cleaner that I have because it's 15 years old, but a vacuum cleaner.

Some are worse than others. Fair enough.

Yeah, but 75 is still a really hard level to maintain cleanliness. if you've got, again, these vibrant, fun spaces. And not saying that every single bar and every single establishment is having these incredibly loud, incredibly boisterous events. Oftentimes, they'll get cited for having outside patio conversations. And so again, I agree with you that we've got to find a resolution here, but as someone representing the state, our state solution right now is not working. It's not fair to residents, and it's not fair to business owners.

Thank you so much, Representative. I don't think I'm sharing screen. I actually tried to just share my screen to validate what you said.

that 75 is about the level of a vacuum cleaner.

But, again, it is a curve that goes straight up. I don't think I might – someone has to tell me. I'm not actually showing my screen, am I? You are not. I can't see it.

You're not.

But, in fact, every 10 that you go up – so if you went up 10 about that, if you were at 85 decibels, it would be, you know, at close range, twice the vacuum cleaner. So you get into some pretty heavy equipment sounds, which would be comparable. So that's totally fair. But the representation that at 75 decibels is only a little bit higher than 65 is not the way that the chart works. So, but I do appreciate that. I think that needs to be the direction of this conversation is how do we put standards in place? Not everybody would be happy, of course, right? There's always, you know, we're always here for compromise, but that we do set standards. I think it's okay for people to have expectations, but as you point out, that those should be

more clear.

And I, you know, certainly a Southside is a lot different, and Bloomfield is a lot different, or Lawrenceville, where there's dense, again, really densely populated areas, a lot of hardscape, which again does strange things to noise, as opposed to soft, you know, you're next to a park

with lots of trees or something like that.

So there's lots of elements to keep in mind as we continue to hear, I think, input on both sides. Appreciate it. That's all I have for this panel, Madam Chair. Thank you.

Thank you. I'll turn it over to Councilman Wilson, who is joining us in person.

Thank you, Chair. Thanks, everyone, for being here. Good to see you all. I had a couple quick questions just to set the grounds for some of the questions I may ask. So from my experience, I always see it come across the table where we're funding PLI. Sorry, Allison, I'm looking at you because I think maybe you know the answer. We're continually funding PLI to get training and they get new... How loud was that?

There's a new...

New devices that we buy, purchase in some bulk, I think, for PLI. But they work during the day, right? And they're the ones that are responsible for going out during the day. So that's great. So just during the day. I know this is for restaurant and bars. I doubt they're making too much noise during the day. But when's the last time we've cited someone for noise?

The city?

Yeah. Oh, I don't know. Nighttime economy. Anyone? Your police.

Well, I mean, from nighttime economy standpoint, they could only be cited for noise if they didn't have a liquor license. Otherwise, the state has to do it. Right, I heard that.

So I don't know. But for PLI... No. You wouldn't know PLI. No. Do you all cite anyone for noise during the day? During the day?

Or at night? At night, occasionally. You have? When's the last time that's happened? Probably sometime last year. You can cite it from a vehicle.

From a vehicle? Yes. Oh, yeah. I'm hearing about a vehicle in Brighton Heights right now. I'm serious. You know about it, right? Or whatever. We're not going to put you on the spot. But there's a loud vehicle. It sounds like gunfire, actually. Yeah. It can actually set off a shot spotter. It does set it off. And there's a lot of resources going out there for this vehicle. All right. But in terms of nighttime, when's the last time that the state has set up a bar?

I can't respond to exactly when the last time. I mean, I do have the, I mean, in 2026, they've had two citations so far, year to date, for noise.

Is that 26 citations?

No, that's, in 2026, there were two citations. Two citations. Two noise citations. In the city? No, a county. Of the county. So for a total over three and three and a half years, 32 noise citations, five of which were outside of the city within boroughs and municipalities in Allegheny County.

What happens in your process? Where does it go?

So after a citation, it would go to an administrative law judge who would put a range of a fine of $50,000 to $1,000 based on previous offenses, et cetera. And then... The liquor code requires that if you have three citations, three noise violations within 24 months, your license can be non-renewed. So they would look at these over 24 months. LCB does non-renewals, so they would be contacting Bureau of Liquor Control Enforcement, also the city, they would be contacting them saying, hey, what incidents are you seeing? And then based on that information, they would determine whether or not they would renew or non-renew a license. But, I mean, the numbers are low because partially it's, they, there's only 113 liquor control enforcement officers for the entire state. and there's over 30,000 liquor licenses. I'm actually waiting. I asked for a number of how many for the western region because that doesn't just mean Allegheny. It includes the counties around it. I think the numbers are around like 50-some officers for that entire area that are going out and doing all liquor control enforcement, not just noise.

Yeah. That's a pretty big task. Yeah. And so then with the, going back to nighttime with the police, you all would be responsible for like a bar or a restaurant with the noise. And the last time, no. All right. That wasn't a gotcha question. I was just really just curious like where we're at with that. Okay. And I heard your response in terms of like you working with the bar owner. You know, if you can hear two blocks away or something like that.

Okay.

Yeah, I'm just getting my bearings. Thanks for having this. I do have, you know, a little insight into what my office gets complaints about. We get a complaint about, like, you know, restaurants and bars sometimes. Definitely not as frequent as my council colleague from the south side, but. Uh, we do get complaints of noise that, uh, we, you know, quite frankly, I continue to tell his story. Uh, when I, when I hear people complain about like the, the helicopter or, um, other noises that typically just exist in an urban environment. I had a, I had a buddy that, uh, I graduated with and he moved above a bar. And then he complained about the bar, like how loud it was. And I was like, well, you moved above the bar. So sometimes, you know, those are kind of one-off situations where people didn't realize that they moved where there's a helicopter, I guess. I guess they thought that maybe some hospitals don't have a helicopter, but major hospitals have helicopters in Pittsburgh. And I typically get those complaints to not have the helicopter. I'm not sure, actually, what the solution is there. But since this is about restaurants as bars, I'm just going to continue to listen to you all and make sure I understand where we're at with this and where we can go. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilman. And I wanted to make sure to utilize our time with this panel to understand what some of the solutions look like. So I guess Lynn, Allison, others, if you want to chime in. that there is a process for a municipality to request an exemption, that there's also a process potentially of a venue themselves potentially getting an exemption, if that's the case, or is it really just a municipality? So municipality, and can you walk us through, either person, walk us through what that looks like and expound on that a little bit, what some of the other solutions look like? Because that's one, but I understand that it's one of many, and it could take a different direction depending on what is the exact right solution for Pittsburgh or various Pittsburgh neighborhoods, right?

Well, Title 40 of the regulations that govern liquor address in Section, I think it's 5.36... It basically outlines every step. The municipality has to submit a resolution that confirms they support the petition to substitute municipal noise enforcement for... in absence of the state police. It would include in it the noise ordinance, the municipal's intention to enforce the ordinance, a written description of all the areas that would be included, including boundary lines and exempted noise areas, various maps and their specific size maps that have to be included. of the geographic area, including designated boundary lines and proposed exempt noise areas. After this is submitted, a public hearing, well, first the municipality would have to propose a location to have a public hearing. Then the LCB would put public notice that this hearing was going to happen. They would come with a hearing examiner and, in cooperation with the municipality, would have a public hearing on this. And they would question, you know, how are you going to enforce this? Make sure, like, they aren't going to approve a resolution that doesn't have teeth behind it. They want to make sure that it's going to be able to be enforced by the municipality that is taking it over. They have 60 days after receipt of the petition and the hearing all happen within that period of time to either approve, disapprove, kind of carte blanche, or they can make modifications based on whether they think there's some health and safety concerns that need to be addressed.

and so the process once the resolution is submitted is 60 days and then it would go to the board thank you and allison would you mind um sharing with us the what you ex if that were to be a path that we took what you what you would expect the day-to-day to look like after that i understand you've already articulated that there are various options or models from other cities in terms of how to demonstrate as we heard that there would be enforcement or teeth behind it that it wouldn't just be the Wild West of noise but and that's not what we would do we're a city we have professionals who work for the city but what what do you expect the day-to-day to look like as a potential well

I think that it would be, I think there'd be a lot more relief on both sides, first of all. I think residents would be happy to have their, when we spoke with them, they said we should be solving our problems locally and we should be the ones handling this. And so I think, you know, to get faster resolution and more effective resolution with local response, which wouldn't have to be police. Other cities have done it different ways. I think from the standpoint of businesses, they wouldn't have to worry as much. I don't think it would really... In the cities that have implemented this, a lot of times what they found is they had... AREAS THAT WERE PROBLEMATIC OR JUST ONE, A LOT OF THE PLACES THAT HAVE DONE IT HAVE BEEN VERY SMALL EXCEPT FOR HARRISBURG AND STATE COLLEGE I WOULD SAY. THE SMALLER CITIES WERE REALLY LOOKING TO, YOU KNOW, PUT THE SCREWS TO A LITTLE BIT. THE BUSINESSES THAT WERE REALLY EGREGIOUS AND REALLY DID DESERVE TO HAVE MORE ENFORCEMENT AND THEY GOT THAT. THEY GOT THAT MORE SWIFTLY. But State College in particular has done it the longest. Now they're exempt because they fell under that change that allowed every other county except Philadelphia and Allegheny. But State College looked at seeking an exemption, and they had it for 15 years or more. But when they first got it, they did it for a year. It's almost like a pilot program. to figure out what some of the bugs are, or whether this is working or not. And you can rescind that process. But they looked at this. They wanted to get this exemption for that very example that I gave at the beginning, where it was like they were looking at two businesses doing the same thing, and they said, this isn't fair. were not able to enforce equitably and that's why they sought the exemption. So I think it'll give us more, the city more ability to take on solving problems in our own way and more swiftly, more efficiently. And I think maybe we might see more entertainment and more places taking on music without that fear of having to reach a zero decibel. You realize that zero decibel at the property line of the business, the city ordinance is- At the license premise. I'm sorry? At the license premise. At the license premise.

Not even at the property line. If you're on the sidewalk, you've got to be at the door of the licensed premise.

But at the city, we're looking at how it is the receiver and how they are experiencing the sound. So doesn't that sound a little more reasonable than, you know... Zero is impossible. We just know you can breathe and it's more than zero. But maybe you won't hear it at the property line. But you could yell. You could yell on the microphone. But I just think, I don't think it will change things in a negative way. I think it will be more of a positive than anything.

I think municipalities that have decided to do the noise exemption are doing it because the one size fits all approach under the state doesn't work. The provision in there that says you can get to 75 decibels still says if you have a municipal noise exemption, that preempts that. So there are situations where a municipality has adopted a noise resolution that is stricter. than what the state has of the 75 decibels. That is what is, that is what takes precedence over what is written in the liquor code. I think that the other thing is that there's a lot of flexibility within the ability to do these noise exemptions. You know, there's certain districts that maybe, you know, it does make sense to have it at 75, whereas another area where you're, you know, maybe you know, there's not many establishments or it's younger families and there's no liquor, you don't have it at 75. I think that that's what the resolution allows to be able to make what works for the municipality that you're in.

If I could add one more thing, I think if you had it at the more, this noise enforcement at a more granular level, you have the ability to be innovative here. Talking to Allison, there are cities that as you're interested in getting what would be equivalent to an amusement permit that if you're gonna do amplified noise, there are opportunities to help you figure out what sound mitigation looks like. How can you do soundproofing as you're building out a new place, as you're renovating a place? And so again, the ability to have this at the municipal level, the city of Pittsburgh gets to determine what intentional noise mitigation looks like and can be more creative in what businesses, bars, establishments can do and what they should be expected to do as well.

I would like to add that these smaller cities were able to carve out a small area that they wanted to focus on because it was a problem. I would say that if we are going to do this, we should do it citywide, because if you're doing it in one area and not the other, you still have the same confusion, right? Still, is it state or is it city? So we could have Southside have the exemption and the rest of the city doesn't, then wouldn't people that want to have music venues would all move to Southside and not people or other districts. So I would warn a little bit against that or at least give it some thought. But I think also that we're not solving that problem of confusion and inequitable enforcement.

Thank you. I am looking to start to wrap up this panel so we can get the other one. But before we do, I want to make sure that, I mean, we haven't heard from public safety representatives for a minute. Is there anything you wanted to respond to that you heard in the last few minutes? And then to anyone else, any final remarks or answers that you wanted to give to questions that we didn't ask?

I appreciate it. For me, I think everything's been covered, and I appreciate the opportunity.

Thank you.

Yeah, I agree.

Everything's been covered, and thank you for having us.

Thank you for being here. Any final thoughts from anyone else? All right. Well, thank you all to our invited guests for panel number one. You're free to go. You're free to stay in the audience and listen, whatever you wish. And I'll ask Allison Hardin to stick around for panel number two as well. While everyone's coming up, I'll read off who we have as our second set of invited guests. David Kushner from Trace Brewing. Melissa Larrick from the Pittsburgh Brewers Guild. Adam Valen from Drusky Entertainment, Alex Moser from Wiggle Whiskey, and Chris Copen from Bottle Rocket.

I know.

Feel free to sit wherever you like. You can join us up here. Oh, that's one big glass of water, huh?

Welcome. So you've heard what we've...

The conversation, the questions that have come up up until now, I guess we'll start with, again, going down the line, you're welcome to introduce yourself, who you are, who you're representing today, and any opening remarks you might have before we open it up to council member questions. Oh, here. Make sure that your microphones are green, and you can just, if you don't mind, leave those on so we don't have to fiddle with them.

Good afternoon, members of Council. Thank you, Councilmember Strasburger, for creating a space for all of us to discuss this important issue. My name is David Kushner. I'm the co-founder of Trace Brewing. We opened in winter of 2020 on Main Street Bloomfield. Our brewery, coffee shop, and taproom has served as a vital community space and safe haven for all. Most notably, the marginalized BIPOC and LGBTQ plus communities. Creating an inclusive space requires more than just words and a mission statement. We work hard to partner with a range of nonprofits, businesses, community organizations, food vendors, artists, entertainers, and musicians who champion these marginalized groups. Our partners are often members of these groups themselves. And with this congregation comes the celebration of our individual and collective culture, manifested by music and other forms of implied expression. PLCB Section 49334 creates a disproportionate and damaging impact on these communities, the small businesses they support, and the Pittsburgh hospitality and nighttime economy as a whole. At its core, the PLCB regulation treats amplified entertainment as a liability and regulatory compliance issue, instead of what it actually is, an economic driver, a cultural asset, and one of the few proven tools businesses have remaining to increase foot traffic and sustain revenue. The regulation effectively creates grounds for enforcement against entertainment activity whenever music or sound can be heard beyond a property line. Zero decibels, zero tolerance. In practice, that creates uncertainty amongst operators, significant inequitable enforcement of the law, and places enormous pressure on independent venues, bars, and mixed-use spaces that are already operating on razor-thin margins. What makes the current state of affairs especially frustrating is that Pennsylvania law already recognizes that cities have the capability to manage these issues locally through reasonable noise ordinances and enforcement mechanisms. In 2022, Governor Walz passed Act 67. We've already chatted about that. This change encompassed every county in the state of Pennsylvania except Allegheny and Philadelphia counties. Take a look at all the counties and cities affected by this change over the last five years since the passage of Act 67. Are police forces overwhelmed by noise complaints? No. Are businesses running amok without an enforcement arm to keep them in place? No. Pittsburgh and Philadelphia are currently the only cities in the country where amplified Sound from liquor license establishments is regulated by a state agency, and furthermore, the only cities where businesses must operate under the unreasonable, impossible to abide by zero decibel, zero tolerance standard. Every other city sets a standard at a decibel level that can be easily measured, or creates a standard where the noise does not, quote, disturb a reasonable person of normal sensitivities. We're the only counties in the country which are playing by this bright-line rule, where if there is any sound, no matter the level, no matter how reasonable, no matter the cause or the purpose, a liquor-licensed business is in violation. The conversation we're having today is not about taking away residents' right to file complaints or seek remedies for legitimate noise concerns. What we are discussing is who should be responsible for enforcement. The answer is the City of Pittsburgh. Right now, Section 49334 places that responsibility in the hands of Pennsylvania State Police through liquor enforcement mechanisms that can threaten a business's license over issues that are fundamentally local in nature and, I would argue, completely disconnected from the statutory purpose of the PLCB. Most concerning LCE noise investigations include the use of plainclothed, undercover, concealed weapon-carrying state police officers that are, unbeknownst to the public, shoulder-to-shoulder with guests in these safe spaces. That's not to say there isn't a time or place these armed officers should be in liquor-licensed spaces, where they need to investigate violence or illicit crimes or unlicensed serving of alcoholic beverages. Our point is that they shouldn't be in these spaces as a sole result of a single, anonymous noise complaint. As we've witnessed, their presence during the raid last May at an LGBTQ plus bar in Bloomfield is unnecessary, purposefully intimidating, overly forceful, and has a chilling effect on the neighborhood and queer community. It put Pittsburgh in a terrible light on a national level. This is not about eliminating accountability. It's about acknowledging that noise disputes in dense urban environments are better addressed at the city level by city police, local code enforcement, and elected officials who understand the context of Pittsburgh neighborhoods, business corridors, and community standards. It's about acknowledging that the perception and experience of the surrounding community runs in direct conflict with the current legislative enforcement duties of the PLCB and LCE. This conflict is real and undeniable. In 2018, the James Street Tavern, which had operated as a community music venue for over 50 years, closed to the public. According to the owner, quote, we have so much support from the north side, all the organizations, all our neighbors have come out to support us. We love being here, but there must be one or two neighbors that don't like us being here, and it's all anonymous. In a stroke of sad irony, the city paper named James Street the, quote, best place to see live local musicians play. On the very same day, the owner decided to shutter its doors as a result of never-ending LCE investigations. How can you be the best in the eyes of your city and a nuisance in the eyes of the state? James Street was not a nuisance bar. Trace Brewing, nor anyone else sitting at this table today, represents a nuisance bar. We cannot continue to let this happen to our beloved businesses in this city. This is about creating a more balanced, modern, and locally controlled system that protects residents while allowing businesses to operate, invest, and contribute to Pittsburgh's economy and culture without fear of inequitable and disproportionate state-level penalties. Pittsburgh is fully capable of balancing residential quality of life with economic vitality. We can support residents while also supporting small businesses that depend on entertainment to survive. Council has the opportunity to advocate for reform that reflects the realities of modern cities and modern conditions. I urge this council to support meaningful reform, pursue broader exemptions for the state regulatory agencies, and advocate for a framework that protects neighborhoods without straining the very businesses that bring life to them. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you very much. We'll just work our way down the line, so please introduce yourself and any remarks you have.

Thank you. Good afternoon, council members. My name is Melissa Larrick, and I serve as the executive director of the Pittsburgh Brewers Guild. We're a nonprofit organization representing 46 independent breweries throughout Allegheny County, 17 of which are located in the city of Pittsburgh. I thank you today for the opportunity to speak. I want to begin by making something very clear. Our members are not asking for an elimination of sound ordinances, nor are we arguing against the rights of residents to expect reasonable peace within their neighborhoods. We believe in responsible business practices, accountability, and reasonable enforcement when legitimate quality of life concerns arise. What we're asking for is for fairness, clarity, and a more reasonable path to resolution. As you explained in your opening remarks, currently Allegheny County and Philadelphia County establishments that hold liquor licenses are subject to a unique enforcement structure regarding amplified sound. if a noise complaint is made against a brewery restaurant or bar the issue does not simply route through local law enforcement or municipal code enforcement as it would for most other businesses under this current structure all it takes is a single complaint to initiate a process that immediately carries consequences far beyond a typical neighborhood dispute the result is that many small businesses are discouraged from hosting all the very special kinds of programming that are quintessential to those third spaces that were mentioned by Representative Powell earlier today. Real quick, I just want to share a quick example from one of our member breweries, Allegheny City Brewing. Shortly after pandemic restrictions eased in 2023, the brewery rented a fully permitted vacant lot on East Ohio Street to create a safe outdoor gathering space for the community. The idea gained support from the Northside Leadership Conference, which funded and promoted a summer music series featuring local musicians. And the event was family-friendly, community-oriented, and intentionally modest in scope, only once per month on Fridays from 5 to 8 p.m. The events had the support from local leadership, including their city council representative and Zone 1 police leadership. But after just one event, the series was forced to shut down. Why? Because someone reported that amplified sound could be heard from the public sidewalk directly in front of the lot. An LCE officer responded and informed the brewery that because they held a liquor license, they were in violation of state law and were being issued an official warning along with notice of future fines. The officer reportedly acknowledged that if the exact same event had hosted or had been hosted by a non-alcohol related business organization, there would likely have been no issue at all. can also speak to this firsthand in addition to my role as executive director i'm the manager of marketing and partnerships at cinderlands we are on the 2600 block of smallman street you're very familiar that our landscape has changed drastically since we've been in business starting in 2019 we have apartments going up all around us so now we have become a residential area and in recent times you know i'm responsible for um you know, the programming, the special, you know, things that require amplified sound. But we really put back on that because we don't want to have these kind of calls or an investigation. We did have that shortly after we opened in 2022. A city of police officer responded to the call. They went around with our general manager, checked the decibels. Everything was great. A few days later, the control board showed up and we were under investigation. So a lot of businesses feel singled out, but our peers in surrounding counties can often work through these similar issues locally through municipal processes and police departments without immediately placing a liquor license under scrutiny. The businesses within the city of Pittsburgh should have access to that same reasonable path towards resolution. We're not asking to avoid accountability or bypass sound ordinances. We're simply asking for a system that distinguishes between true nuisance behavior and responsible programming for the community, just like those third spaces makes the breweries kind of sets them apart from your regular quintessential bar. I thank you all for your time. Thank you very much.

Thank you. My name is Chris Copen. I own Bottle Rocket Social Hall in the Allentown neighborhood of Pittsburgh. Since opening in 2022, Bottle Rocket has hosted thousands of events and become a staple of our community, a welcoming place for everybody from Rick Seebeck to Pete Davidson. I'm here today to speak about our personal experience with the noise ordinance enforcement. enforcement that probably won't appear in many statistics and are frequently swept under the rug by businesses afraid of speaking out or publicizing the actions that are taking place in their business. On October 31st, 2023, during a a sold-out concert, our bar was swarmed by over a dozen uniformed police officers. The show was halted, customers were told to line up against the walls to be counted, and officers searched our premises from top to bottom, ruining one of the busiest nights of our year. In the end, they cited us with one violation, an improperly framed liquor license. I happened to be out of town during this raid and spent the next five days trying to answer the very basic questions of who visited our bar and why. Finally, with help from the Office of Nighttime Economy, we were able to track down the answer. We had been visited by the Nuisance Bar Task Force. This was shocking to me. I knew what a nuisance bar was, and I was very embarrassed that mine could be considered one. But when I inquired as to what exactly put us on their list, I was given only vagaries. After a week of questions, we were eventually told that we had compiled dozens of 311 noise complaints in the previous months, complaints that we were given no indication existed until the nuisance bar task force arrived. When we asked for any additional information about these 311 complaints, including the ability to look at our 311 file, we were flatly denied. It is important to know that Bottle Rocket is quite literally located directly in between two police-owned parking lots and is adjacent to the Zone 3 police station. In theory, there is no easier bar in the city for the police or any other enforcement officer to have a dialogue with should they need to. In all of our day-to-day conversations with the police as our neighbor, noise complaints were never brought up. The officers who made up the nuisance bar task force on Halloween night were mostly the exact same officers who we said hello to every day as they walked by our front door to get to their police cars. Like all of the businesses appearing before you today, we have a strong relationship with our neighborhood and take pride in our status as a cornerstone for our community. Had anyone alerted us to these complaints, we would have been happy to remedy them immediately, whether that be through simple actions the night the complaints occurred or by investing in longer-term solutions. These conversations, though, were not allowed to happen and, perhaps more shockingly, seemed to be of little interest to the people ostensibly tasked with having them. This would lead me to believe that the current system also leads to a similar feeling for the citizens making legitimate complaints to whom it would appear nothing is being done while their complaints are logged into a wholly unseeable file stacking up for years. I fully understand and support the need for enforcement against bad actors in our community, but the current system feels designed almost exclusively to embarrass and punish us, with zero interest in having a dialogue or actually working to solve complaints. Even the most actively engaged or buttoned up operations are given no realistic path to avoid this treatment, because there is no warning or record of complaints or where they come from until the task force is on your doorstep. The zero-sum approach to the ordinance has also led to the rabid weaponization of it by people who seek to use it as revenge for unrelated personal issues, whether that be standing as a safe space in our community, attracting the use of public parking, or for the perceived slight of operating as we have for years next to newly redeveloped property. There simply has to be a better way for the city and public to communicate with the businesses in their neighborhood a way that is not dozens of armed officers storming into our spaces during peak business, leaving behind only a trail of confusion and unanswerable questions. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, council members. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. Councilman Drosberger, thank you for hosting this. My name is Adam Valen. I serve as the marketing director for Drosky Entertainment, which is an independently owned concert promoter in the city of Pittsburgh, as well as the vice president of the Pennsylvania chapter of NEVA, which is the National Independent Venue Association. We are a national organization that represents independent venues, promoters, comedy clubs, and festivals across the country. And before I dive deeper, I just want to state that I'm not a club owner, but I've worked in and around independent clubs for the last 13 years. I'm here today because independent venues across Pittsburgh are facing a really growing challenge around how the city's noise ordinance is enforced, and more specifically, who enforces it. Right now, when a noise complaint is made against the liquor-licensed venue, enforcement is often routed through the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Enforcement, triggering the Nuisance Bar Task Force, rather than through city personnel focused on measuring and resolving sound violations directly. What should be a straightforward quality of life issue around decibel levels has instead become tied to liquor enforcement actions that can escalate into bar raids, operational disruptions, and punitive investigations that create fear for patrons, staff, artists, and small businesses alike. For many independent venues, these responses feel disproportionate to the issue being reported. Much like to Chris's story, imagine being a patron attending a concert, a comedy show, or a community event, and suddenly seeing armed enforcement officers enter a venue over a noise complaint. That experience is alarming, it disrupts operations in real time, it damages reputations, it discourages attendance, and more importantly, it does not actually solve the underlying issue of sound mitigation and neighborhood coexistence. Stories like those mentioned before and after myself are not uncommon, and while they are a small number of us representing some nightlife and licensed establishments, I want to acknowledge the membership that are not here and that I encourage council members to gather experiences like those that have been mentioned before when dealing with things like bar raids and whether or not there was any resolution and what residual damages were dealt with at the onset and follow-up of those events. We consider many of our venues to be safe spaces and not a nuisance to the community. We are the spaces where people look to when they're looking to enjoy themselves, to laugh, to cry, to sing, and to cheer. When you remove the safety net from under us and all of a sudden all that space is occupied by fear, conflict, and more importantly, lack of resolution, the space no longer feels safe and that lifelong customer may change their perspective of vibrancy, arts, entertainment, nightlife, and elect to remain home. As Allison mentioned before, we want to thrive and become a sociable city. From a marketing perspective as well, people are much more likely to remember that one negative experience, as Chris mentioned, and hold that longer over the 99 great times that they've had in that establishment and may affect their relationship with that venue as a whole out of a reaction that had nothing to do with noise. Independent venues want to be good neighbors. Many of us are actively engaged in activating third spaces, as many of us have mentioned, hosting community events, fundraisers, town halls, safety workshops, and more outside of just programming events. Most operators are willing to work collaboratively on sound management, communication with nearby residents, curfews, decibel monitoring, and reasonable sound operational improvements. But the current enforcement structure skips over problem solving and moves immediately into a system designed primarily around liquor code enforcement rather than municipal noise resolution. That distinction matters because independent venues are not simply bars. They are cultural infrastructure in addition to economic drivers. Across Pennsylvania from our PA State Alive report, the independent live sector contributes approximately $2 billion to the state GDP. We generate $3.6 billion in total economic output. We support more than 24,000 jobs. We drive over $278 million in off-site tourism spending at nearby restaurants, hotels, transportation services, local businesses. These venues are economic engines for neighborhoods and business districts throughout Pittsburgh. They activate corridors after traditional business hours, they attract tourism, they provide opportunities for artists, production workers, security, bartenders, stagehands, photographers, marketers, and countless others who make up Pittsburgh's creative economy. And yet, despite that impact, only 28% of independent stages across Pennsylvania have been reported profitable in 2024. This is already an industry operating on rates within margins, as many have already alluded to. So when inequitable enforcement mechanisms create additional instability, uncertainty, or fear around operating live events, it becomes harder for these businesses to survive, especially small and mid-sized independent operators who do not have the resources of multinational entertainment corporations. What we're discussing and advocating for today is not the elimination of accountability. We believe noise ordinance matter. Residents deserve peace, safety, and responsiveness from the city. If the issue is sound levels, then the response should prioritize sound measurement, mediation, compliance pathways, and community-based resolution, not enforcement structures designed to penalize good faith actors. Pittsburgh has an opportunity to create a more balanced framework, one that protects residents while also supporting independent cultural institutions that are vital to the city's economy and identity. Other major cities recognize that thriving music and entertainment ecosystems require collaboration between government, neighborhood, and venues, not adversarial enforcement models that undermine trust. Pittsburgh is long been recognized as a city with rich cultural and musical legacy, but if we want artists, entrepreneurs, venues, and creative workers to continue investing in the city, we need policies that encourage sustainability and partnership rather than fear and unpredictability. At the end of the day, this conversation is bigger than noise. It's about how Pittsburgh chooses to support small businesses, nightlife, tourism, arts and culture, and the independent operators who help make the city vibrant. We are asking for a fair, more modern, and more locally accountable approach to enforcement, one that addresses legitimate concerns while allowing independent venues to continue serving the communities, neighborhoods, and economic ecosystems that rely on them. Thank you.

Thank you.

COO with Wiggle Whiskey. Thank you all for being here. And Bobby, I'll apologize. One of my employees lives in your district and complains a lot. Not about you. We'll talk offline. Okay, we can. You'll know. So I'm going to take a little different approach and appreciate what everyone said. We have a bar, a restaurant, and we manufacture in the Strip District. And My big issue right now is we have a gentleman that moved in way after us, because we've been there since 2012, and complains about us multiple times. And we've gone through two investigations in two years. So I guess there's been 26 investigations in the last couple years, and two of them have been knots. We close at 9 o'clock. We are not a high-volume bar. We are a tasting facility, and we manufacture. If this gentleman keeps, and I will tell you, too, that the investigation is not a light one. We have to pull two years of receipts of everything. We have to talk about, I have to show an employee roster. I mean, it is in-depth. And frankly, I'm not even sure the investigator wants to be there, because he knows that there's probably more serious issues out there, but they are driven by complaints. The biggest issue for us, though, is I've got 80 employees. Our focus is on making great whiskey for the city of Pittsburgh and beyond, and because this gentleman doesn't like when we have an acoustic guitar player playing, our whole business could go down, and we're not gonna put up with it much longer, and we're gonna move. We will leave the Strip District if this continues, because I don't have the time bandwidth to go through it, and it's not a threat, it's just a fact. So that's a whole other portion of that. And the way our liquor license is, how we would do business is, if our liquor license were to be suspended, or our license is coupled with a manufacturing license, we wouldn't be able to produce. And our whole business would sink. So that's kind of where I am. I'm hopeful that we can figure out another way to do this. And again, just like everybody else here, we are in complete respect of being good neighbors. I like being a good neighbor. lived in the city limits for most of my life, but I think we need to find a different way, because this isn't working. Thank you for having me and listening.

Thank you all for your opening remarks, your testimony. Really powerful, and I appreciate all that you were able to kind of illustrate to build off of the conversation that we had initially. I'll reserve my questions for now and turn it over to my council colleagues in the same order. So, Councilperson Charland, you're up.

I'm sorry. So thank you guys for being here. I kind of want to start off, we had the discussion with more of the governmental and public safety folks beforehand. As you guys listened to that conversation, is there anything that you wanted to add? Anything that kind of came to mind as you were hearing us discuss with them about what policies might look like?

Yeah, I think the question about the statistics and everything, I definitely get it. It looks like a low number, but the situation I outlined at Bottle Rocket is not represented in any statistic. It was just an enforcement action during a night of enforcement actions, and I know there's A similar thing occurred at P-Town, which created a lot of publicity and really did not make the city look great. And that's also not recorded as technically a noise ordinance complaint, right? But it was triggered by 311 noise ordinance calls. So, yeah, I would just, you know, that would be the one thing I would say is a lot of this stuff is kind of invisible. And a lot of times, you know, businesses don't want to talk about this, that it happened, because it is embarrassing to say that businesses Dozens of uniformed police officers raided your business in the middle of the day or in the middle of the night. You know, if you say that to customers, they probably, why? What are you hiding? What are you doing that you shouldn't be doing, right? So, you know, I just, I think that that goes a long way to say that there are, this is happening, but it's probably happening more frequently than it's being reported, I guess.

And I will add, I think the data really cuts both ways, specifically towards the police department. I'll say that I don't think the police department should be the one, the Pittsburgh Police Department, enforcing the noise ordinance. I think that could be nighttime economy or PLI. But what we heard is that there isn't bandwidth for the police to do this. But we then also heard that there's only been 27 complaints over the last three years. So I think that When you look at the number of complaints coming in, it's not about the quantity. It's just about the disproportionate impact on these specific businesses when these complaints are elevated to the state level. So, you know, I think that the Pittsburgh Police do a great job responding to those complaints. I think that, you know, there are hundreds probably that are called in specifically to liquor businesses, and they will come in and they'll ask for these to be turned down. They'll understand what time the ban's going to be over. So the police are already responding to noise complaints. They're just not the ones responsible for enforcing the regulation against these liquor licenses. And that's what we're asking a change for. So I will say that, like, I think there's definitely a balance when it comes to how much the Pittsburgh police are able to handle.

Um, you know, so I think the thing that kind of comes to mind here, if I can speak frankly, is that this, this, the way we approach sound enforcement, it, it seems like just never work in my favor. Like it, it hurts the people that we want to help and it doesn't help us like the, the problematic establishments, you know, the, the capos on Carson that, that we really like are need to find ways to enforce, to combat them. And we never get any opportunities there. I mean, but then like, you know, I'm pretty well, everybody knows that I'm a huge fan of Bottle Rocket. I'm going there tonight, you know, so, you know, my buddies and I got tickets. Like, Did I hear that you were looked at as a nuisance bar? And the neighborhood loves you. You guys are beloved in the neighborhood. And you're also not next to...

It's not a super dense neighborhood, I would say.

Well, I mean, you guys have space. You have parking lots on either side. The police parking lots. Yeah. I mean, Miss Judy is the one that would complain. She's a regular at your establishment. And she's like one block away. So it's like to hear that that happens and then we can't get – for all of the issues we have at 1401 East Carson, we can't get any sort of enforcement on them. It just – it seems like it's a policy that is broken. It's backwards.

Yeah. I think – I said it in my statement, but it feels – It's currently designed exclusively to embarrass us, not actually solve the problem. I think, and this goes to the point of the police not having the resources to be the ones enforcing it, it's like we probably They would be asked to enforce less if we were actually having dialogue with the people making the complaints and if we were given that opportunity. But instead, it's like a complaint is made. It's assumed that it's to be true. And therefore, there's action that needs to be taken. There's no intermediate step of actually acting as neighbors or acting as a community and being able to sit down with the person. I get that there's situations where that needs to be anonymous. Maybe those people don't feel comfortable. reporting it in person or having a conversation, but there needs to be some dialogue with the businesses, I think, to figure out, you know, is this a bottle rocket where we'd be happy to solve the problem if we were alerted to it, or is this another, you know, bar that they don't care? It needs to be some intermediate step, you know, in my opinion.

Yeah, and I'll add, too, that that is, in between investigations, we had, we apparently had people undercover. at our place, which is just ludicrous. So, I mean, the amount of resources even on the state side, it's just, it's ludicrous.

Yeah, I think to add to that, that it's important, you know, having this conversation that it does need to be truly collaborative between the business owners and the community that we operate in. However, the biggest issue at hand is that mitigation of taking, you know, whenever the complaint supersedes local law enforcement, goes straight to the LCE, and it puts all of our businesses in jeopardy. That is the largest point here at hand. I think that at the end of the day, as a community, we can all work together, but the biggest threat that we have is just how we are going to operate if we continue with these investigations, these threats.

I just want to remind that point. You know, this is some of what Office of Nighttime Economy should be able to do is to step in and assist businesses. But if it is an LCE investigation, we're prohibited from doing that, which is, again, why aren't we helping people get into compliance rather than just, oh, we got you? I think something else that hasn't been brought up... I mean, maybe you're talking about the layers of investigation, but something that's disturbing to me is that when a sound complaint is issued, part of that investigation is to door knock around the neighborhood to see if other neighbors have a problem with the business. And I mean, it just seems like you're seeking out more complaint rather than just dealing with what's there and the investigation goes beyond sound to you know the whole operation and the staffing and all of that if it's a truly a sound complaint just stick in that lane i think rather than trying to look for other violations so it 100 i'm just i mean it as i said there was incredible amount of things that we had disclosed including financials and that really opens us up

And then I think the last thing I kind of wanted to just mention, as we talk a lot about what we can do to help independent venues, with sound issues, you can get sound mitigation. Have you guys explored that? Can you tell us a little bit about how expensive that is? What I'm really looking for is for you guys to kind of say like,

this is very cost prohibitive i'll speak and i'll speak on behalf of someone who um wrote to me yesterday the owner of spirit in lawrenceville leoc and they've been under investigation numerous times as source of one neighbor who they've um tried to you know work with through conversations and having drinks um to no avail in 2017 they spent fifteen thousand dollars on soundproofing measures 2019 they spent forty five thousand dollars on advanced installation In 2022 to 2023, they spent another $15,000 on acoustic engineers to improve sound mitigation. And in 2024, they spent $325,000 trying to insulate their roof, and they are still getting complaints.

And I'll just jump in and say, you know, we talked about this at the venue panel, but this is an industry where 60% of the businesses are, you know, lost money in 2025, and the 40% that are making money, the average profit margin is 2% to 3%. Mm-hmm.

You're doing community service. Sometimes it feels that way.

Well, you know, as Adam and Chris, you guys know, we've been talking a lot about the future of doing an independent venue task force and what that would look like. But this is definitely going to be a topic. So council members, be prepared that We're going to be talking about what it would look like to be able to try and help create some city grants for some of the sound mitigation. Maybe some level is not enough. So that's a lot of money.

Yeah, and I think that when you spend that kind of money, that always adds context to the conversation, where if there's on the local level, you're able to then assess the reasonableness of these complaints, that when a business takes the time and effort to work with their neighbors to implement changes, Then they're not recognized because the LCEs, their hands are really tied. They're saying, look, the law is the law. If I can hear it right at the entrance, you're still breaking it. They're not weighing the reasonableness and all the mitigation all the time that that owner might have been doing in good faith.

And I would say, too, that that has really led to weaponization of this by people who don't agree with the types of programming that we're doing. They don't like that their parking is being taken up by people visiting the neighborhood. There's a thousand reasons that people call on these complaints, and it's a zero-sum game. They're all treated equally.

All right. Well, thank you guys very much. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. I'll turn it back over to Councilwoman Deb Gross.

Thank you all. I really appreciate your being here today and your comments and especially the, I think the approach that I've heard is that there's, you know, a two-way street.

where businesses and neighbors have both a responsibility to be good neighbors.

And so I really, I think it echoes what I was framing in other kinds of businesses, whether it was hospitals or grocery stores, even the firing range, where there is, it may not be easy, it may take up some time, but there is a way to try to identify I also want to tease out what I'm hearing about the very distressing examples of the nuisance bar task force raids, which were really upsetting.

to many patrons and the operators. I'm sorry, I didn't know about the bottle rocket raid. I'm concerned to hear about that one as well.

I think we need another conversation about what we're doing with our nuisance bar task force. And so what I'm hearing is that removing the LCEs

zero decibel threshold, which is unattainable, but then also removes them also from enforcement if we enact the municipal exception and establish our own standards and our own enforcement mechanism.

And then hearing that there's some maybe disagreement with people about whether that should be at the police department for enforcement or at the National Economy for enforcement, I want to be sure that as the city, there isn't then just some other 3-1-1 type of call that triggers these types of raids by the nuisance bar task force. Because to not have any transparency about the complaints that were reported, we need a better definition of what is considered a nuisance bar. should not be going there. And shouldn't be raiding bars that maybe just have some 311 complaints that they say are there, but no one can see what they are, even though they're anonymous. That record should be transparent. And we have a whole website where 311 calls are supposedly recorded and made transparent, and the businesses are given opportunities with the directors, because I certainly represent a lot of daytime activity as well, and people get, both commercial businesses get 3-1-1 complaints, but also residential property owners get 3-1-1 complaints, and there's a pathway to fixing and addressing the problem that's quite long, and so as to not have people losing their homes, for example, or something like that. So... I certainly think this is a good beginning to the conversation to figure out how we're not just giving LCE too much enforcement power where we don't need to, but that I wanna, I think I'll have some separate questions, not for this panelist, right, because these are bar owners here at the table, but that I think there's more digging and assurances the council needs my colleagues as well, for when this, you know, again, as you described, that people in like bulletproof vests with automatic weapons are clearing an establishment of all of its patrons over, you know, complaints we're not even sure what they are. You know, certainly like P-Town, a business that I never have had a resident claim was a nuisance bar. And I don't consider to to spend the time and attention to figuring out what kinds of noise levels are appropriate at what levels, where sound proofing is needed. Certainly the examples that were given about Sputirit, we checked our own records. While there still are complaints coming in to the LCE, my office has not had a complaint about Spirit for many years.

And we did work closely with them in those earlier years that were cited because we did get the complaints from neighbors. they'll see they're not coming to my office. So I do think that most, you know, certainly as a well-loved institution as well, lots of, lots of celebrations there, lots of, really an amazing community space that is relished by very many people.

So there's a lot to tease out here, and we want to make sure that we are both providing livable neighborhoods, but also vibrant business districts. So I look forward to that.

Thank you, Councilwoman. I didn't know if there, I wanted to open it up to anyone here to respond to any of that. I'll also note that yes, Councilwoman, I do agree with you that there is a separate conversation that absolutely has to be had that we should all probably have as council along with our partners at city government and at the state as well around the nuisance bar task force Alison Harnden, as you've pointed out, even the name presumes guilt before being proven innocent, I guess, or whatnot. So I agree that that is entangled in here and maybe a separate conversation because it involves somewhat different partners, but obviously related. But before I punt it over to Councilman Bobby Wilson, anything that you wanted to add, anyone wanted to add right now based on what we just heard?

maybe just for the public to have an understanding of what nuisance bar task force is because it could be construed that it's just our city police going in it is a collective task force of state county and city agencies one of which is our police also our permits license and inspection fire marshal the county department of health the county DA's office, county probation, state liquor enforcement, I don't think I'm, oh, ATF, yeah. I mean, sometimes not all of them go out all at once. It depends on what they plan to investigate that night. But, and to your point, there are other cities that call them either joint education teams or joint, or compliance, compliance teams, or compliance teams.

Thank you. Councilman Wilson.

Thank you. Thank you, Chair. I did want to start us off with one question. So I've not been to the Bottle Rocket yet, but I plan to. But I did have a question. Was it named after the Wes Anderson film?

No, it's a common question. It was named after an actual bottle rocket I found actually in an antique store in Lawrenceville. And yeah, I love the movie, but yeah. Do you think more people are going there because they think it's named after the movie? Yeah, probably. I think 90% of people think it's named after the movie.

I will go there because they love the movie.

We're not going to dispel the rumors.

All right, so I'm happy that you went over the News Support Task Force and who's all involved in that, because definitely hearing all these stories, it makes me realize that we do not get all the complaints about what the bars are going through, bars and restaurants are going through. And I feel like I get more complaints about the power being out. No, seriously, like restaurants say, how can you get the power back on? Because, like, they're just, like, just say, not because of storm, but say they're doing, you know, Duquesne Lights doing work. They're like, do they know that we have 70 reservations that we're going to have to cancel now, you know, or something like that. But, you know, that's just one example to add to all the other. you know, uh, situations that you are going through with these, uh, you know, with everything that you described here. Yeah. And I want to double down on, you know, all the comments, uh, praising you all for continuing to, uh, run your business as difficult as it, as it is as a business owner. I feel like we, we should be giving you trophies. I'm serious let's do it but I look forward to continuing this conversation especially the ones that are my district to understand more about what you're going through and how I could be of any help because I don't know I guess I'm gonna go in here and think that it's probably not that bad you know in terms of the type of noise or environment that you're creating at the businesses and I'm not looking at the ones that are my desk. Um, so I'd like to work through that. And, um, if there's anything on the city side that, you know, we could change to make it, you know, easier for you all to operate because, you know, I, there definitely are some nuisances out there. I have them in my, my district. We're working through, uh, one right now. And, uh, But like I said, I'm gonna go out on a limb and think that you're probably not the nuisance that I'm talking about. And I think some of us just need to understand that we live, we chose to live in the city. You chose to live next to an establishment that was a club or a bar, and there will be some noise. If it gets too rowdy, we need to measure that. We need to measure how rowdy, you know, what's rowdy. So, you know, what's too rowdy. And I think that's a good time to revisit this moving forward. So thanks for having this post-agenda, and I appreciate you all being here and investing in Pittsburgh. Thanks.

Thank you.

Any responses? Or I'm happy to ask one final question.

Well, really, I want to circle back because we covered this a little bit. And I know, Allison, you drilled into this a little bit. But if the city were to assume enforcement authority under its either existing noise ordinance or an amended noise ordinance, if necessary, What would any of you want to see out of that framework to ensure consistent and fair and ideally proactive work, but really clear standards that you can plan around? So when you're planning programming or when you're planning for an event, whether it's a special event or it's a weekly event or it's a multi-weekly event, that also is sensitive to the needs of neighbors without allowing one neighbor to weaponize it against you, right? What do you think that looks like? And if anyone has experiences working with cities that have obtained the... Well, maybe that second part of the question is for Allison, but what would you all want to see? What do you think makes sense? If you haven't already heard it mentioned today or you wanted to add something additional.

Sure. So I would say, I think you touched on some of those things, transparency, consistency, proportionality. I would love to see a system that requires mediation that where it's not anonymous or if a neighbor feels like their quality of life is being so effective, then there should be a requirement to sit down with the business or representatives or whatever organizations, community groups to get a better understanding of what can be done. And we're talking about the frequency of the events, the time of day, what is it exactly that can be done. But I think it should be required from both sides and not just the business and just a system that puts a lot of weight on the local community groups and the local officials who represent a larger portion of that community.

Yeah, just to kind of add to that is, you know, once again, this is like, you know, removing that weaponization of these calls. The businesses or the entities that were, you know, mentioned from Council on Personal Growth, like, you know, the construction, the hospital, the grocery stores that are all, you know, making this amplified sound, their businesses are not in jeopardy of operating as are ours, right? So, yeah, like, just, you know, making sure that, we are moving toward positive reinforcement, resolution, and really just coming back down to being those good neighbors that we claim to be.

I think another thing in that, too, is also the lens of education from both business and public of understanding the education around sound and understanding how it works, but also in the New Orleans example, it mixed with that of having grant-based programming that can allow for businesses to be able to tap into funding if they need so they don't have to make $325,000 worth of renovations because of one neighbor. It's been becoming a huge prohibitive factor when we have one neighbor that's weaponizing these things against us and having the guilty until proven innocent mentality.

And I think, too, just lifelong Pittsburgher, just this isn't the spirit of Pittsburgh, and I'm not making a pun there, but Pittsburgh is known for being good neighborly human beings, and this is not Pittsburgh. So how can we make it more Pittsburgh?

One thing that Brett, who works in my office behind me, always brings up is like we've forgotten how to talk to people and work out our problems. And I know sometimes I know a lot of council people get people saying, here, take care of this for me. We need to teach people. What do they say? Give a person a fish or give them a fishing pole, right? All I know is give a mouse a cookie. No, I'm kidding. So I think we really need to teach people how to be good neighbors, too. And that's like giving them the opportunity to communicate with each other, letting them know that there is a problem that needs to be addressed. But this lack of transparency doesn't allow for that.

Yeah, there's a neighbor I have on a different topic who recently was, the whole street was frustrated with a sort of lack of upkeep of one house. And this neighbor... wrote to all of her neighbors and copied our office and said and we've filed the 311 request and there is you know a court date coming up but i also just knocked on the door with a smile on my face and said here's what we'd like you to do and you know what she did she did it she took care of her property and it was like the first time in five years that i've heard of a i know people do it all the time but that have actually been made aware of a neighbor going to a neighbor and saying hey you know there's neighbor to neighbor i'd like you to take care of your property And it worked. So imagine what we can do if we arm neighbors with that type of skill set, again, to be neighborly and to... It's not going to work every time.

It's not going to work for every person.

But it certainly could be better than sticking the LCE enforcement on businesses who are trying to make it work as a third space. So, okay, well... Are there any, I don't have any questions. I feel like we've covered a lot of ground today. Is there anything, I'll offer the same opportunity to answer a question or to state something or to get into a topic area that we should have asked about and didn't. Anything else from anyone here?

Go ahead, Dave. I'll just say, as a closing statement, I think the city already does a really good job of regulating sound. I think that whether it's an individual playing music in their car or their house, whether it's a leaf blower, whether it's you in a contracting business, we already have regulations that touch on sound. ask yourselves why do we have a regulation that touches on sound just because alcohol is being sold and i think that's what we're really looking for is to detach that and let the liquor control board and and lce do what they do best and focus on the selling and the maintenance the production of alcohol the city already has legislation and an enforcement protocol for sound and we're just asking to be a part of that I was just gonna ask what next steps might be.

Great, thank you. Well, anything else from council members who are here? Oh, one more thing.

Some of us went to a meeting with some of the music community recently, and I think there's a great desire from that group as well, who are, you know, people that produce music or that make albums out of music, that have recording studios. They're very interested in this topic as well because they, as artists, need places to play and produce their music, so... I know there's a community that's not represented here. And also, we don't have a... Well, I guess you have a restaurant license. I mean, everybody does. But a legitimate restaurant industry is not met here.

We're a restaurant.

Yeah, I mean, your license is, but basically you're a brewery, right?

We serve a lot of food. I like their food. Thank you.

Anyway, I think the Restaurant Association and some of the more what you would see as sit-down dining and even fine dining that wants to have entertainment would be supportive of this as well.

Thank you. Well, I don't think I can say it better than, David, you just said it. This is really about this unequal treatment between a business that happens to serve alcohol and a business that doesn't. And it really is just a policy, as my seven-year-old would say, it just doesn't make any sense. So it really doesn't make any sense, and that's what we're trying to find the solution to. As for next steps, this was the purpose of this, and I probably should have started with that, is to help educate... our fellow council members on some of the specifics of state law, city policy, and the opportunities that we see in the current state and the current challenges faced. From here, I think we have some opportunities to discuss amongst ourselves, hopefully, from my perspective, hopefully seeking an exemption for municipality and to be able to have our own local control over over these types of businesses and find the solution that works best for us. From there, though, it is going to take a lot of tailoring to Pittsburgh, what works in State College, what works in Erie, what works in some of our neighbors, right, like Bellevue and Westier isn't gonna necessarily work for Pittsburgh, so scalpel approach rather than a sledgehammer to get it right, as Councilwoman Gross mentioned, for Pittsburgh. our owners, our establishments, and the neighbors. So understanding our limitations when it comes to staffing of police and enforcement agencies. With that, I really, really want to thank all of you for being here, for everyone, for their time, for my council colleagues, for their comments and questions and observations. I learned a lot today, and we will be keeping in touch with next steps and future action here to make your businesses and our neighborhoods as successful and thriving as possible. So thank you. With that, we have officially exhausted the business of this post agenda, and the meeting is adjourned.