Cable Advisory Committee - Regular Meeting

Good morning and welcome to the Standing Committee's meeting for Wednesday, June 24th, 2026. All council meetings will be live streamed on the city's website and for guest speakers, please do not turn off your microphones. Our first order of business is roll call. Will the clerk please take the roll?

Mr. Sharland. Mr. Coghill. Here. Ms. Gross. Mr. Lavelle. Here. Mr. Mosley. Here. Ms. Salinatro. Here. Ms. Warwick.

Here.

Mr. Wilson. Here. Ms. Strasburg. Here. Ms. Strasburger, chair. Here. Seven members present.

Thank you very much. Our next order of business is to amend the agenda. Can I have a motion to amend the agenda?

So moved.

Second. All in favor? Aye. Amended agenda. Our next order of business is public comment. I would like to remind all speakers that the rules of council state that comments are limited to matters of concern, official action, or deliberation, which are or may be before city council, and profanity will not be permitted. Please state your name and neighborhood for the record. You will have three minutes to speak. There being no registered speakers, we will take comments from those in the audience wishing to speak.

I apologize. I registered this morning, although I'm not sure why that wasn't registered. I'm here to make good on the promise I made last week that I would come here every week to share the story of the constituents who are being harmed by the lockdown of East Carson Street between 12th and 18th Streets on weekend evenings. Today, I'm here to share the story of Elizabeth, She and her husband live near 12th and Bingham, and they run a small business on the Southside Flats. They live just a block from the 12th Street security entrance that's locked down on weekend evenings on East Carson Street. They just want to serve their community and raise their family in the neighborhood. But the extra security and the police last weekend created a commotion that lasted well into the night, where revelers were replaced with metal detectors. This family cannot spend a weekend evening as a family along East Carson Street, and if they spend time in their own neighborhood, their walk home is forced along darker, more dangerous side streets. They used to enjoy a late weekend dinner at Piper's on 18th with friends and family, but this is no longer a safe prospect for them. The idea of being followed by security in the zone if she dares to bring her family in makes her feel harassed and suspected in her own city. She simply does not want to live in a police state. What I just described to you in a brief minute and a half is not how neighbors treat neighbors. This is how occupiers treat the occupied. I ask you, end the discrimination. Stop this vile experiment on East Carson before it gets worse.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Hello, Rick Smith, North Oakland District 8, speaking on Resolution 670, which you're voting on today, an extension of the surveillance technology report from IMP. Just wanting to put in a request for inclusion or consideration to obscure detailed information, for example, on the Serpentine Drive petition, there are names, addresses and phone numbers of the people and in this day and age of LLM training and everything to be cognizant of that and to obscure that data from, you know, the data that you need and obscure the data that the public can get easy access to. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

My name is Yvonne F. Brown. I live at 715 Mercer Street. That's the high rise at the top of Bedford. It's 190 apartments. As I spoke to the ladies that left yesterday, we were talking about the people with strokes, and I explained to them that I had had a stroke myself, and that I take, and in order to try to get my, it's on my left side, in order to get my body together, I do a lot of walking. I walk to city council. I walk back. I get a Gatorade because if this arm or leg gets to pulling, the doctor said I should drink that. Yesterday, oh, and I wanted to tell you that coming down, coming down Bedford and then the big building, you got this little park. And I was walking through the park and I seen a bunny rabbit. Do you know a bunny, a little baby bunny rabbit was eating some weeds. And as I walked past, he heard me. He flew. But can you picture that? A bunny rabbit in the center of... downtown and things like that that makes me really truly believe like i told my husband it's got to be a god because who made the bunny rabbit who made the trees and so on now yesterday we had the speaker that spoke about his son the death of his son so when he spoke about that you know I could feel how he was feeling. I mean, I could feel his pain. I can't feel the same way he feels. But he lost a son, and I did too. And I've been coming for years down here. And I usually don't speak too much. I try not to speak a lot about my son, Tony, because a lot of people don't want to hear it. But... We just had Juneteenth. And Juneteenth, you need to understand what it's for, what it stands for. And it stands for freedom. Do you understand that the slaves had been freed for over two years, but they were still being slaves on a plantation. And someone came and told them that they were free. Also, I want you to look at my son. That's my son, Tony. And I have come down for years... Just like this speaker came about his son. He asked questions. All I wanted to do was have an inquest for my son. I never had one. When I seen Sopala, Sopala tells me, this was last year, that they no longer have inquests, but you must go before the Attorney General. Okay, he tells me that he wrote to the Attorney General, and he turned it down. I asked him for a letter. That's all I wanted, a letter.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Hello. Good morning. My name is Billy Vaughn. So I'm just here to speak a little bit, give my public comment for the mothers and the parents that have their children waiting on a waiting list for Learn and Earn this summer. So I got my bullet points. And I'm not speaking as someone from the outside. I'm speaking as someone who participated in Learn and Earn. I'm speaking as a parent and a community advocate. And I was able to find my juvenile folder, about this big, and I have the orientation date when I did learn and earn, when I was 15, I'm 37, and it was through Bloomfield Barfield. And I also have the date where I was admitted to Shuman. And that was literally two months after Learn and Earn ended. So Learn and Earn did a lot for me. It gave me structure. It exposed me to the workforce. So I'm a strong supporter of Learn and Earn. But I think there's a problem with a lack of communication for the parents. I was able to just use my resources to contact Bloomfield Garfield to get an update on my daughter's status. And when I contacted them, I was told she was on a waiting list. And I was told there's 200 youth, young adults on this waiting list. And it wasn't until I made a post on Facebook where other parents were informed. So I'm speaking today because A million dollars with a million dollar match from the city is a lot of money to not have basic customer service to give updates to parents. We did a lengthy application, we gathered documents, we went to the outreaches, we did everything we had to do to sign these kids up and for 200 of them to have to sit and wait during the summer I think, and it's, you know, if there's a waiting list, there's a waiting list. My issue was the lack of communication. Until this day, no parents received any emails, any updates about this waiting list. I was told there's not even a number. These are just kids that did not get accepted into a position. So as someone who has a nonprofit, I have a thrift store. It's amazing. I would love to accept kids, to show them. how thrifting is an environmental impact to their communities. I'm open to accepting children, but I'm just asking. A million dollars is a lot to not have just basic, that's intake. Those kids could be hired to make those phone calls to these parents. So I just ask that there's updates to the parents on the status of these kids that are waiting, and that's it. Thank you. Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Good morning, Special Agent Sunshine. The missing child, Cerise Taylor. Lord, thank you for opening my eyes yet again. A delay is not a deny. Thank you for whatever you're doing in the background. I know it's a lot, and I'm truly grateful. It's the ignorance for me, Lavelle. I know you don't want me to be important, but guess what? I am. I must be, because you don't want nobody to know my real name. Say it. Go ahead. Say my real name. Go ahead. I dare you. Cat, huh? To anybody who took a gag order not to say my real name and tell me who I really am, I'm praying for Archangel Michael who carries a sword to remove your tongue so you never speak again. Since you don't want to talk, we'll make it permanent in Jesus' name. Keep praying with him. Think he won't do it and he don't hear me praying. I pray out loud. I went to the state council meeting yesterday and discovered they're $100 million in deficit. What, as of last year? What are these people doing with money, y'all? Why we don't see it? Why am I sleeping on the concrete? No sleep. Who the hell? Y'all don't even give me bus fare to get here from Smithfield Street. Praise God for both of my legs. A lot of people don't have them. I'm not out here with a sign. I'm homeless. I'm helpless. I'm hungry. Help me. Food will never be the problem. Ever. Ephesians 6.12 says, For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world, and against spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. Evil, Lavelle. you're in a same-sex relationship with, they don't give a damn about you. If it's consensual, really, why you don't come in here dressed up like you do for them, whoever it is. Matthew 19.26 says, with a man, this is impossible. With man, this is impossible. But with God, all things are possible. Like living in peace. Even when you sleep on the concrete. Even when you don't have money. He's thankful to supply you with all your needs through his riches and glory in Christ. I'm a never testimony of it. Do you not see it?

I'm healthy.

I'm not sick. I don't hate nobody. I don't have no hate in my heart. But you guys, like really? Thank you Lord for loving me.

Next speaker, please. Are there any further speakers? As a reminder, our public comment is meant to refer to matters that may or are before City Council. Slander of individual members is not permitted, and the next time that happens, there will be a verbal warning, and then your microphone will be turned off. That is a reminder of what the purpose of our public comment is. Thank you. There being no further public speakers, we will move on to our standing committee's agenda. Our first committee is the Finance and Law Committee.

Defer paper bill five 95 resolution amending resolution two 70 of 2026 authorizing the issuance of a warrant in favor of Robert Mahowski and their legal counsel, Samuel J. Cords and associates for a single payment in 2026 and an amount not to exceed $108,296 and 64 cent in full and final settlement of litigation file in the common please court of Allegheny County in the United States equal employment opportunity commission.

Motion to approve. Second.

Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 595, please say aye. Aye. Affirmative recommendation. New Papers, Bill 608.

Resolution amending Resolution 857 of 2023, effective December 27, 2023, entitled Resolution Adopting and Approving the 2024 Capital Budget, the Proposed 2024 Community Development Program, and the 2024 through 2029 Capital Improvement Program by Transferring $31,508.90 from Neighborhood Initiatives Fund to Slope Failure Remediation.

Motion to approve. Second, a brief discussion.

Discussion?

Yeah, I just want to thank Tom Sastak and the good folks at the Department of Public Works, as well as the Second Division, Ed Williams, as well as Lisa Chaffee, the City Forester, for everything they did to get this retaining wall in Lincoln-Lemington done. Also, my Chief of Staff, Grace Turner-Taylor for the work that she did. And I also have to give a shout out to Rick Earl for the work that he did through the media to raise this issue up on Dunmore Street in Lincoln-Lamington. And we were able to not only repair a retaining wall, that had fallen into disrepair for many, many years, but we were also able to restore the steps that had been grown over and hadn't been used in many, many years to connect upper and lower Dunmore, as well as getting some paving done on that street that was sorely needed. Again, another example of a team effort coming together for community members. And I really appreciate the many kind words for the residents of Dunmore Street and their thanks for really appreciating and having some patience that it took to get this done. So just thanks all around. I'm just really appreciative of everyone that participated in this team effort to get this done.

Thank you. Further discussion? Congratulations, Councilman. Thanks for your words on that. Thank you. All in favor of Bill 608, please say aye. Aye. Affirmative recommendation. Bill 629.

Resolution authorizing the issuance of a warrant in favor of Thomas Bench and Sarah Bench and Swenson, Herrer, and Engel Law Firm for a single payment in 2026 in an amount not to exceed $70,000 in full and final settlement of litigation filed in the Common Pleas Court of Allegheny County.

Motion approved.

Second. Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 629, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation, Bill 630.

Resolution authorizing the issuance of a warrant in favor of Joseph Engelmeyer and Alpern Schubert, PC, for single payment in 2026 and amount not to exceed $60,000 in full and final settlement of litigation file in the Common Pleas Court of Allegheny County.

Motion approved. Second.

Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 630, please say aye. Aye. Affirmative recommendation, Bill 631.

Resolution authorizing the issuance of a warrant in favor of Daryl and Karen Luciana and the Massa Law Group PC for a single payment in 2026 in an amount not to exceed $90,000 in full and final settlement of litigation filed in the Common Pleas Court of Allegheny County.

Motion approved. Second.

Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 631, please say aye. Aye. Affirmative recommendation, Bill 632.

Resolution authorizing the issuance of a warrant in favor of Anna Nichols and G. Clinton Kelly, her attorney, for a single payment in 2026 in an amount not to exceed $40,000 in full and final settlement of litigation filed in the Common Pleas Court of Allegheny County.

Motion to approve. Second. Second.

Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 632, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Affirmative recommendation, Bill 633.

Resolution authorizing the issuance of a warrant in favor of Clinton and Irene Runco and Matz's Law LLC for a single payment in 2026 in an amount not to exceed $60,000 and full and final settlement of litigation filed in the Common Pleas Court of Allegheny County.

Motion approved. Second.

Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 633, please say aye. Aye. Affirmative recommendation, Bill 634.

Resolution authorizing the issuance of a warrant in favor of Tyrone Perry and Swenson, Perrer, and Engel Law Firm for a single payment in 2026 in an amount not to exceed $62,500 in full and final settlement of litigation file in the Common Pleas Court of Allegheny County.

Motion to approve. Second.

Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 634, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation. Bill 635.

Resolution authorizing the issuance of a warrant in favor of Tyrone Perry as administrator of the estate of Velva Perry and Swenson Perrer and Engel Law Firm. for a single payment in 2026 in an amount not to exceed $62,500 in full and final settlement of litigation filed in the Common Pleas Court of Allegheny County.

Motion to approve. Second.

Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 635, please say aye. Aye. Affirmative recommendation. Bill 636.

Resolution authorizing the Mayor and Director of Finance to enter into a cooperation agreement with the Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh regarding the library's use of $400,000 in Keystone Recreation Park and Conservation grant monies for the Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh for the replacement of the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning and roofing systems at the Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh's Squirrel Hill branch.

motion approved second discussion seeing none all in favor of bill 636 please say aye aye affirmative recommendation that moves us to invoices is there a motion on invoices so moved second discussion seeing none all in favor of invoices please say aye aye aye Invoices are approved. That moves us to P cards. Is there a motion on P cards?

So moved. Second.

Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of P-cards, please say aye. Aye. P-cards are approved. That moves us to Public Safety and Wellness Committee, chaired by Councilman Coghill.

Bill 612, resolution authorizing pursuant to Chapter 210 of the City Code, the Mayor and the Director of the Department of Public Safety to accept a donation from King Street Productions, Inc. of office furniture valued at $10,190.95 for the Public Safety Admin Office.

Motion to approve. Second.

Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 612, please say aye. Aye. Affirmative recommendation. That moves us to Public Works and Infrastructure Committee, chaired by Councilwoman Salinatra.

The firm paper is Bill 414. Resolution authorizing the mayor and the director of finance on behalf of the city of Pittsburgh to enter into an agreement or agreements or amendments thereto with various parties for the purpose of accessing city property while certain railroad crossings at Lockway East and Lockway West, Council District 7, are being upgraded or removed at no cost to the city.

Motion to approve?

Second.

Discussion? Councilwoman Gross?

Yes, thank you. So Council will note that we've been holding this for some time. We continue to meet with the parties and there's been more information that's come out. Some of the residents have done right to know requests with the various parties. And so with the support of the chair and also just to note, we don't need to amend it now, but this actually does kind of, I think, straddle the line between District 7 and District 9. 20 years ago, I think it was all District 7, but there's a line between council districts now. So I'm going to go ahead and motion to hold again for another six weeks or so. Thank you. Second.

I will say, I just want to put on the record that there is Pittsburgh Water, as a board member of Pittsburgh Water, I'm aware of the fact that Pittsburgh Water is eager to move forward as quickly as possible because their half billion dollar project hinges on this agreement going through at this very sort of messy site. I don't know all of the details there. I just wanted to note for other council members' awareness that this holding of the bill is holding up a pretty expensive project for them. So with hopes that communication continues with the neighbors and that that works out very, very quickly. But I will, you know, I'll support the six-week hold as necessary. I defer to the council members, but I did want to note that. Yeah. Council Member Gross.

As a PWC board member, if you'd like us to share with you what we found out, because we've heard from the U.S. Army Corps, certainly ADRR is party to this, to one of the railroads. And then we've got some 30 residents here. nearby, again, some of whom have right to know some information that I have yet to see all and process, so I do think there's a lot of moving parts, and we want to make sure that we respect everybody's, not just wishes, but rights in this case. There's some property rights issues, I think, that aren't clear. So we'd be happy to loop you in on those conversations. Council Member Salinetro, Councilman Mosley, and myself have had some of the information. I think it's still an ongoing discussion.

Thank you. Yes, I'd appreciate that. Certainly.

Thank you. Okay.

All in favor of a six-week hold on Bill 414, please say aye. Aye. Bill be held for six weeks. New Papers, Bill 615.

Resolution authorizing the Mayor, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the Director of the Department of Public Works to enter into an agreement or agreements with the Pennsylvania Department of Aging for the purpose of receiving grant funds in the amount of $40,000 to install flooring at the Homewood Healthy Active Living Center.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 615, please say aye. Aye. Affirmative recommendation, Bill 616.

Resolution providing for a reimbursement agreement or agreements with the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation for costs associated with the preliminary design phase of the Corliss Tunnel project and providing for the payment of costs thereof not to exceed $1 million, reimbursable at 80% and a municipal share of Commonwealth incurred costs at a cost to the City of Pittsburgh not to exceed $10,000. Motion to approve.

Seconds.

Question. Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 616, please say aye. Aye. Affirmative recommendation, Bill 617.

Resolution providing for an agreement or agreements with STV Incorporated for costs associated with the preliminary engineering phase of the East Sycamore Street Bridge project, providing for the payment of the cost thereof not to exceed $384,501.50, reimbursable at 100%.

Motion to approve?

Second.

Discretion? Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 617, please say aye. Aye. Affirmative recommendation. Bill 618.

Resolution providing for an agreement or agreements with STV Incorporated for costs associated with the preliminary engineering phase of the McArdle Bridge over East Sycamore project, providing for the payment of the cost thereof not to exceed $378,345.04, reimbursable at 100%. Motion to approve. Second.

Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 618, please say aye. Aye. Affirmative recommendation, Bill 619.

Resolution authorizing acceptance by the City of Pittsburgh of the dedication of a portion of Lot and Block 10N357 in the 5th Ward 6th Council District.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 619, please say aye. Aye. Affirmative recommendation. Bill 620.

Resolution granting unto PA Pitt Holdings LLC, their successors and assigns, the privilege and license to construct, maintain, and use at their own cost and expense, new shoring, and an 8-inch private water line that will extend into the right-of-way at no cost to the City, 4th Ward, 3rd Council District.

Motion to approve. Second. Second. Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 620, please say aye. Aye. Affirmative recommendation. Bill 621.

Resolution granting unto M.I. Strip Works, LLC, their successors and assigned the privilege and license to construct, maintain, and use at their own cost and expense a new private sewer main and five private sewer manholes that will extend into the right-of-way at no cost to the City's Second Ward, First Council District. Motion to approve. Discussion?

Second.

Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 621, please say aye. Aye. Affirmative recommendation, Bill 622.

Resolution granting a vacation of Edlam Way, an unopened paper street from Cornwall Street to Colombo Street at no cost to the city, 10th Ward, 9th Council District.

Motion to approve. Second.

Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 622, please say aye. Aye. Affirmative recommendation. Councilwoman Salinetro, would you like to read Bill 624 through 628 altogether? Yes, please. Okay.

Bill 624, resolution approving the recommendations made by the Director of the Department of Mobility and Infrastructure that the concrete portion of Cedarbrook Drive situated east of Whitewood Drive and beginning at the intersection of Whitewood Drive and ending at 116 Cedarbrook Drive at the termination of this easterly block should be paved with asphalt in accordance with Section 417.06 of the Pittsburgh Code of Ordinances. Bill 625. Resolution approving the recommendations made by the Director of the Department of Mobility and Infrastructure that the concrete portion of Haston Avenue situated north of Silver Oak Drive and beginning at the intersection of Silver Oak Drive and ending at 2531 Haston Avenue at the termination of this northerly block should be paved with asphalt in accordance with Section 417.06 of the Pittsburgh Code of Ordinances. Bill 626. Resolution approving the recommendation made by the Director of the Department of Mobility and Infrastructure that the concrete portion of Kentmore Drive situated east of Whitewood Drive and beginning at the intersection of Whitewood Drive and ending at 117 Kentmore Drive at the termination of this easterly block should be paved with asphalt in accordance with Section 4-1706 of the Pittsburgh Code of Ordinances. Bill 627, resolution approving the recommendation made by the Director of the Department of Mobility and Infrastructure that the concrete portion of Red Oak Drive situated west of Haston Avenue and beginning at the intersection of Haston Avenue and ending at 2510 Red Oak Drive at the termination of this westerly block should be paved with asphalt in accordance with Section 417.06 of the Pittsburgh Code of Ordinances. and 628 resolution approving the recommendation made by the director of the department of mobility and infrastructure that the concrete portion of whitewood drive situated north of arnold street and beginning at the intersection of arnold street and ending at the intersection of steuben street at the termination of this northerly block should be paid with asphalt in accordance with section 417-06 of the pittsburgh code of ordinances motion to approve second discussion

seeing none all those in favor of bill 624 through 628 please say aye aye affirmative affirmative recommendation that moves us to human resources committee chair by council person charlotte bill 611 resolution authorizing the mayor director of the department of human resources and civil service and the director of the department of public safety

to enter into an agreement or agreements with partner for work for operation and administration of the Learn and Earn Summer Youth Employment Program. Total cost not to exceed $1 million over one year.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion?

Discussion.

Council President LaBelle.

Thank you. So first, let me just say I'm actually not against this, but I do want to speak to process. I think the process is out of line. So last year, we passed an amendment to the Southwest Trust Fund that was intended to put. guardrails around the spending of the fund as well as provide more transparency and sort of governance to the actual fund itself. One of the things that was passed in that piece of legislation was the fact that every year an annual allocation plan was supposed to be created for the actual fund that would then guide the spending of the fund. That allocation plan has not been approved yet. Just for everyone's knowledge, the steering committee for the front of which myself, Councilman Mosley, Councilman Wilson sit on met this past Monday in which we actually did discuss the allocation plan. However, it was not voted on because we were having a larger discussion of sort of what was happening in 2001 is not necessarily happening in 2026 right and so we may need to think of new sort of more innovative ways on how we're actually spending the funds and Chief Williams, Director Williams, excuse me, Director Shelter Williams, also spoke about the fact that while yes, there is a surplus of funds sitting in the account, the intent was not to simply spend it for the sake of spending it, but rather have a very intentional effort on how to spend it down to make sure it was having the greatest impact. Also, in that meeting on Monday, this was actually never brought up, the fact that there was an intent to take the million dollars from that fund to do this. And so for me, I'm uncomfortable not having done the first step of creating the allocation plan, which legislation actually calls for, to then say we're now going to begin spending dollars out of that fund. For me personally, I'm uncomfortable. That's not to speak to the worthiness of the spend, if that makes sense to members. it can absolutely be argued that creating that's spending additional money whether it be a million or two or three on a learning our program makes all the sense in the world um or creating after school program or doing any of that work or even we talked about and this is going to come up we talked about the safe passages program which is really a pps program that the city is now being asked to pay for We can make the argument, well, I can make the argument, that if we're paying for it, PPS should be paying at least half of that cost. But at the same time, it's also a very worthy cause, and we can see that it's actually working and it's having impact within our community. So I'm not speaking to the worthiness of the spend. I'm speaking to my personal concern over we're actually not following the process. What I will also just share with members is, because I need to get a handle over this as well, is that you all may recall when we were going through the reopening of the budget, on numerous occasions, I asked, are we exceeding the cap, the 40% cap that the self-advised trust fund is supposed to spend on personnel? Because if you all recall, the dollars were always supposed to be going directly, the majority were always supposed to be going directly into the community for these sort of purposes. And I was told then that we didn't believe we were exceeding that cap. Well, we absolutely are, as of our meeting this Monday. I think we're around close to $7 million is actually being spent on staff between all various departments, which is way above the 40% cap. So we need to get a handle on that as well. So I say all that to say, while this is absolutely the worthy thing to do, and I'm not trying to I'm speaking to a larger process concern I have with the fund and the concern that if we simply begin to just begin spending down. we will be outside the boundaries of what these odds were intended for. And more so, I'm hoping, and this is somewhat on me, to work with the administration to really set the parameters of how and what is the best way to expend these funds for what is happening in 2006 as opposed to what was happening in 2021. So those are simply my comments. Again, members do if you choose, but I just want to be on the record with my concern over process. Thank you.

Thank you. Further discussion? Council Member Warwick. Yeah, thank you.

So, yeah, I want to echo what Council President is saying here. Learn and earn. Safe passages. And I believe after-school programming and summer programming are vital programs that we need to be investing in. We have been talking nonstop about our youth here in the city and about... you know, them needing structure and places to go and programming, right, to, you know, give them something to do, right, in out-of-school hours, right? And, you know, I have another bill. I don't know if it would be worthwhile to read that one before we do the... the break for the amusement tax, but I'll leave that up to the chairwoman. Point of order that we will adjourn this meeting and then take up another meeting for... Yeah, that's what I was saying, if it would be worth, you know, doing the... the Bergwin Rec Center bill before that, but I'll leave that up to you. But... I think that there is a larger discussion that needs to happen over stop the violence, right, and how that money is allocated. And that is something that I'm 100% willing and actually eager to do, right? Primarily, from my perspective, is to raise the cap or take away the cap on city parks and allow city parks to do more with that money, partnering, you know, whether that's with their own operations, whether that is doing RFPs with community groups, whether that is partnering with existing sort of more robust operations like the YMCA Boys and Girls Club and things like that. It seems to me that it's worth holding this. to have this larger discussion if members, you know, feel that this is a larger discussion that needs to be had. I am certainly open to the larger discussion, right, of how we, you know, of what is this plan? You know, can we see the Stop the Violence plan? You know, there's $10 million right now sitting unencumbered in an account and lots of need, right? And, you know, as we learn and earn, there's a wait list, right? Safe passages. They're, you know, very close to laying off staff at the end of the month. In my district, I have a rec center that is about to be fully renovated and going to be empty because there's, you know, no funding to do after-school programming out of it. Anyway, I'll leave it at that for now. But I think this is a critical conversation, and I'm glad that we are having it right now. Thank you. Councilwoman Gross.

Thank you. I've just been to speak at a very high level about Stop the Violence funds, and I appreciate that other members are really working out the details. I also think that some of these programs that we've seen are like Safe Passages are great because... The way residents, I think, have asked for us to invest more in their communities, that's a great example. I think, as Councilman Lovell pointed out, that this additional investment in Learn and Earn is also an additional investment in community and actual people in the city. And that's what we've been asked to do over the last many years, since about 2020, 2021. And so another way of framing it is people ask us not to only react to violence, but also to kind of invest in people and communities to prevent violence. I think that these kinds of programs also are reflective there. And then we get to the part of how we currently have a cap on how much we can spend on staff. And I also understand the importance of focusing on making sure that we have outcomes to invest in communities. I don't know if this is maybe reflective of what Councilwoman Ward was saying in some way as well, but I think the cap now is reflective of how our city departments have not been oriented on investments in community and in people. And so we had to ensure that the allocations were going to the community organizations who were doing that work. Is that my version of how I think is best? No. I really do think that I'd hear from residents who grew up in the neighborhoods that I represent that there used to be adults on city payroll who did this work. There used to be adults in those rec centers who were city employees who were there for kids. And I know people who say their lives were saved because they could go to that rec center every day after school because maybe sometimes home isn't safe or their streets in their neighborhood aren't safe. And so that, I think, is a worthy goal. What I think the safeguard does with the cap on employment is that we don't want to just siphon off these funds

for city payroll that isn't effectuating the outcomes that they're meant for.

So I just wanted to throw in that. I think we're going in the right direction. I respect the committee's recommendations about process here. And again, just to clarify, we've already funded a million dollars in Partners for Work, and this is additional because of the demand? Am I understanding where we're at with this? We can do interrogatory.

Interrogatory? Interrogatory. Well, yes, we can certainly call back. But my understanding is because of the grant we got from the foundation, I think Hillman, required a matching amount. And so they gave us a million. We need a matching amount. And so, yes, a good, easy place to take it from is the top-of-the-bottom trust fund.

But is the funding for Partners for Work and Learn and Earn right now zero?

No.

No. So we're going, this is trying to go above and beyond. I just wanted to clarify that again for the public that we are not, we haven't done nothing. We continue to, we're kind of doing the same thing with Learn and Earn that we've done in previous years is that there's so much more demand. And it's a great opportunity to do even more investing. in the people in our community that everyone, you know, need, that want us to be, you know, investing in. So I'm eager that we can figure out a way to work this out. I don't know what that is. I appreciate it. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Councilperson Charlene, followed by Councilman Wilson.

Yes. Chief Singer, I see you lingering if you'd like to join the table here. So, you know, I just want to say, Council President, I understand your concerns about kind of the order of operations on this. And if I can allow interrogatory here, do you get the sense that the board would be supportive of this? if that decision did happen?

Oh, I do. Just to be clear, I'm actually going to vote for this. I'm making a larger point that we collectively, between council and the administration, need to get a sort of a better graph. or a handle on how these dollars are going to be expended. What is the highest and best uses? I absolutely believe, and they can speak, other members can speak for themselves, that generally speaking, the board would say this is a worthy reason of spending the dollars, not planning on voting for it today. I'm trying to make a larger conversation. That's all.

Thank you. Yeah, and I agree with that. And I think, you know, all of us within one way or another have had a discussion about how we need to kind of wrap our heads around what we think the spending plan for Stop the Violence should be. And, you know, I appreciate the council members that are on that board, you know, trying to figure that sort that out i just i think with dollars in hand from um from outside partners we've got to move forward on this today um we don't want to you know not hold up our end of the bargain uh for this vital the expansion of this vital program here so um i just want to make that clear that i think someone else is willing to help us out we need to to take advantage of that today But I'm with you. We need to figure out what we're going to do with the rest of the $10 million. Thank you.

Thank you. Councilman Wilson.

Thank you, Chair. I just want to say the basic premise of what I'm looking at here. Can you just review? Because my understanding is that this would make the program year-round. Can you explain how this would grow with these dollars?

Correct. So as was said earlier. My name is Matt Singer. I work as deputy chief of staff to the mayor. You're correct. This would expand the program from just being a summer program to a year-round program. It'd be a pilot to see how it goes with that expansion to make it a full year-round program for young adults. The pilot would run on two different tracks. There'd be kids that are 16 to 17. Everyone's getting paid work experience, but they'd be doing so now also during the school year. For those younger kids, it's really building things like communication, teamwork, seeing what it's like to be in the workplace, help them try to figure out what career path they might want to go into. And then the second track is young adults 18 to 23. Also, there'd be connected to paid work experiences. they're specifically will be on training getting credentialing if that's needed for the field they want to go into and really nailing down those career goals those placements specifically are to help people get like job specific hands-on experience whereas for the younger track a lot of that is that initial exposure the experience is still great but they might not know exactly what career they want to go into yet so it does help them kind of place that down the learning room program it's a fantastic program that the city and other partners worked on for years We believe this expansion will go a long way towards helping with financial literacy, financial empowerments for our youth, getting them that work experience, having that career readiness so they're better able to enter the job market or figure out what they ultimately want to do for a career later on in life, and also gives young adults and children and teens a structured programming to do where they're able gaining those life skills. And ultimately, we think that this can contribute towards reductions in youth violence. We think that giving people opportunities like this is a big component for any strategy that the city continues to develop for reducing youth violence.

Thanks. I appreciate you going over that. And then who's the partner that has the other million? The Richard King Mellon Foundation. Okay. Thanks for reminding us. And I couldn't just listen to you talk about the age... of the individuals that would benefit from the program really speaks to the sign of the times, especially how we're hearing how much, you know, young adults, teens, they need more programming and, you know, getting paid a job or trying to figure out what you're going to do, you know, after you leave high school is pretty important. So thanks for reviewing all that. Thanks. Yeah. Thank you.

Thank you. Second round, Council Member Warwick.

Yeah.

I'm so sorry. I missed your hand. That's okay. I was hiding back there. First round. I appreciate it. First round.

Thank you, Madam Chair. No problems. I'll admit I don't know the... exactly how learning functions, who they reach out to. From all that I hear and I understand, it seems like a really great program. I'm a big believer in getting, working directly with kids. I always like to say I like to get into the schools. You know, a relationship I don't think would, condone that right now, but I really like reaching directly into kids. And one thing Pittsburgh is, we are rich in foundations, which a lot of other cities are not. So anytime we have an opportunity to tap into funds from one of our great foundations, in this case, the Richard King Mellon Foundation, you know, we need to take advantage of that. So our $1 million becomes $2 million. I agree when I hear other members talking about the process and guidelines around, you know, how we move forward in spending. you know uh verbiage that we need to put in there so we're all on the same page so i welcome those talks but uh yeah i i feel i i'm in support today so so it feels like a good worthwhile cause and again i hate to pass up the foundation money so i'll be supportive thank you thank you councilman mosley

Yeah, I'm going to thank Council President, you know, for keeping more copious notes than I do at our Stop the Violence meetings. Even though it was two days ago with everything going on, it feels like it was like two Mondays ago. And I do think it is important because one of the things that we did talk about in that meeting is making sure that the Stop the Violence Fund Committee is in alignment with the administration and in alignment with our community partners. And it's taken us a while to really begin to get to that process. As we know, it's a new administration and all these things take time as they put their team together and To add the other important point, as a very critical individual in all this work, is the new assistant director of public safety, Cornel Jones, who is always quick to remind me he's only been there for four weeks. I know it was four weeks because last week he was reminding me he had only been in office for three weeks. He's a very, very critical person. So as he gets his feet planted in the ground in his new position, moving from a consultant outside the city to a staff person at public safety uh you know he's gonna play you know a really really critical role um you know uh moving forward you know as we address the challenges that our city faces that many cities face um around the country so i just wanted to thank the council president um for reminding uh me in particular about you know the many things that we discussed And in our meeting on Monday and how we do, you know, have to figure out, you know, our process because there's just so many worthy programs. There's so many worthy initiatives. And we just have to make sure that we are following what's been codified by law and how we are. supposed to be stewards of those funds, but making sure that they do get out to so many worthy programs and worthy initiatives and ideas that are being brought to us to make our city safer. So I really appreciate you bringing up Monday's meetings. I think that's something in in the weeks to come um you know we really have to make sure uh that we figure out quickly and i believe uh next month um you know we i think we should be able to um approve the allocation plan um you know because time is of the essence you know it's very important um it's very important for the public to know um you know as well what we're deliberating over so um so those just you know my thoughts right now is as we as we wrestle with you know, this proposal as well as other proposals that are on the agenda today.

Thank you. Second round, Council Member Warwick.

Yeah, thanks. Is... Well, so, yeah, I just want to ask just a few details about the program itself. So R.K. Mellon is putting in a million, we're putting in a million. Is this... Are the opportunities that this money is funding, are they here at the city or are they just like at multiple companies or wherever?

My understanding would be the similar opportunities that I have now where a lot of the big institutional employers like the city, for example, are able to do it. But similarly with the summer program, employers are allowed to sign up to offer to host and employ the program participants. It wouldn't just be city jobs.

Okay, so the money... And is there going to be a distinction, like the R.K. Mellon money could be used by whatever, for PNC or some other organization, and our money is for city positions? Or is it just all?

Yeah, similar to the program now, where it's both the city and the county, when they contribute funding, it's to the program overall. I don't believe they track, so the money that the city puts in only goes to program participants paired with the city.

Okay. I think that might actually, well, at any rate, but, and do we know how much, like what's the hourly wage for the various age groups?

I don't have the hourly wage in front of me. I apologize. I can get that information and follow up with you.

okay okay that would be uh because um previously with learn and earn and again i'm very supportive i i it's a great program i'm not but um but previously um the wage for the the the you like the young the younger set was was quite low i mean it was i don't remember it exactly but it was in the like under 12 an hour range which and we had to learn and earn student in our office, but it was challenging because those same age group can, you know, could go work at Target for more, right? Which... is obviously when you're at that age, right? Like the dollar amount is important, right? Like how much you're actually earning. And then the older age group was more around the 15 range. But again, you know what I mean? At that older age, you could go maybe get a job somewhere else in the getting closer to like 20 bucks an hour. So, you know, and also with the older group, companies who wanted to, I don't want to speak, I'm not sure about the younger group, but if a company wanted to engage the higher level of pay, they actually paid in, which I found like an odd system, right, where they were paying into learning or like paying partner for work for the person to come. And what they were paying for was the payroll, like all the admin behind like getting the person ramped up, which was fine. But then that's why the person was being paid at that $15 an hour range. So if this grant, well, grant and then our money going in could help know set those costs aside so that the you know what i mean the admin could be paid for and then the actual participant could be paid like an a wage that is equivalent to what they could get i'll just say at target right that would be it'd be nice to know if there's any information from partner for work on that yeah i'm happy to get that information and i'll provide that with you yeah just to increase the um you know, the incentive to participate in the program, right? Like, the higher, the more money you can make, the greater incentive. And this is, and it's, of course, I mean, no knock on target.

I'm sure there's lots of opportunities, you know, there to grow.

They have some good programs, too. But, you know, this is, you know, we want to get people in, and especially the older ones as well. So, anyway, that's it for me. Again, I'm very, very supportive of this program.

Thank you.

Thank you. Councilman Wilson.

I'm not trying to be funny, but is Target one of the employers?

I am not sure off the top of my head.

I didn't, like, does the program seek to, like, is that one of the jobs, like, to learn how to be a clerk? Or stock shelves?

Generally, my understanding is no. Generally, it's more work where, especially for the younger track, it's more so a learning experience of them just swapping in for a standard full-time employee job.

Okay. Yeah. Okay, that was my understanding. And we're paying like below 15? Like kids can make money below 15 years old? I'm not sure what the hourly wage is.

Age or cost. Age.

I've been to questions just like below the age of 15 or can a 14, 13-year-old get paid through the Learn and Earn program?

Are you asking can they get paid or what they get paid? Can they get paid? Yes. Yeah. For the year-round pilot for – or no, excuse me, sorry. The two tracks are 16 to 17 and 18 to 23 for the full-time. Yeah. For the standard Learn and Earn, anyone who participates in the program – can and does get paid for the $1 million this is going toward to match the R.K. Mellon grant. The year-round track will specifically be targeted to 16- and 70-year-olds on that first tier, first track, and then 18- to 23-year-olds on the second track.

Yeah, I remember hearing this before. I just want to make sure I'm knowledgeable about what the program is seeking to accomplish. So thanks. I don't know. I was listening to what you were saying. I don't think you can be under 15 and work at Target. You can? Okay. It sounded like you were saying under 15. I was just trying to understand the argument. Thanks.

you further discussion second round seeing none the motion is currently a motion to approve so take all in favor of bill 611 please say aye

Aye. Aye.

Affirmative recommendation. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

That moves us to Land Use and Economic Development Committee, chaired by Councilman Wilson.

Deferred Papers, Bill 426, Ordinance Amending and Supplementing the Pittsburgh City Code Title II Fiscal Article IX Property Taxes by Creating a New Chapter 269, Real Estate Tax Exemptions for Construction or Adaptive Reuse of Buildings on the Pittsburgh's North Side.

Motion to approve. Second. Second.

Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 426, please say aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation, Bill 544.

Ordinance amending and supplementing the Pittsburgh Code of Ordinances, Title VII, Business Licensing, Article IX, Amusement Businesses with a New Chapter, Chapter 774, Mechanical Amusement Devices, Tax and Licenses.

Motion to approve. Second. I defer to the bill sponsor. Thanks.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilman Wilson. Excuse me. First of all, I wanted to thank you all for indulging me and moving this at a fast pace. And I want to explain exactly where we're at with everything. I want to start with thanking my staff, Blake, Elon, and Katie. They did a tremendous amount of work on this. in a fast period of time, and it required a lot of research and looking into. Dr. Rossiter was very helpful. And of course, Sean Carter, you were invaluable to this whole thing. His knowledges to legislation, how we move it, and the rules and regulations behind it are invaluable. So thank you, Sean. And stick around in case other members have questions. So originally, as I stated, we set out to impose this tax last year as an alternative when we were talking about raising property taxes. So, In clear transparency, you know, had I known the financial situation that we were in, a true look at it, and thanks to the administration for really pointing it out, I would have voted for that property tax, I will tell you, after knowing the fact where we're at financially. So after we passed that, and that was good. I think it well needed... income and revenue that we need um we just kind of put put the uh brakes on the mechanical amusement tax but learning and thinking more through it i thought well we better you know still pursue it because the situation we're in even though we're estimating i think another was it 20 million dollars a year we're estimating for property taxes 30 million dollars a year we still find ourselves in a hole so um so we decided to pursue it Originally, we were trying to hit the timeline where we could have this in place where we could budget in additional revenues that we estimated at $2 to $3 million for next year, 2027. And we all are familiar, and I think everybody here knows, that the state Supreme Court has taken this issue up and has deemed the skills games as gambling devices. So they were awarded four months or allotted four months to come up with – uh their plan whatever it may be where common knowledge and everybody's belief is that they're going to impose a tax on the revenues of these machines and if they do so all the work that we have into this over the past year is probably for not but we don't know what the state's going to do there's no telling there's a there's a number of things that they can do best case scenario is if the state decides to change the classification from gaming to reclassify it because in the research that we've done, we've seen that it would be very difficult for the state to to have everybody who has these machines to require a license for them, a gambling license. So they're going to have some real challenges, and that's why I'm not sure what the state's going to do. We're not sure exactly what's going to fall out from it all. But if we pass this today, and I will ask council for your support in passing this today, we will be in the position, regardless of what the state does. So if the state... You know, who knows, maybe they... where we can still collect this tax, or maybe they will permit people or municipalities, which there are many, almost a quarter of the municipalities in Pennsylvania are already collecting this tax. And some of them have been collecting it for 40 years. So I don't know what they're going to do with those municipalities. They're going to say, look, you're no longer permitted to collect that tax. Maybe they'll ground further them in. Maybe they'll show preference and you know, allot those municipalities the monies that they will impose a tax on. We're not sure, basically, is what I'm saying. So, in the meantime, we decided to pursue it, and this will put us in position for when that time comes, regardless of what the state does, to, if we have to table it for good, then we have to table for good. It's just a lot of work that goes, you know, by the wayside, but it was good practice, and, you know, it was worthwhile, and I don't want to take the chance that if we're in the position to still collect it, that we can't. We already have a lot of the groundwork in this. We have countless research dealing with other municipalities, talking to my state elected officials around Allegheny County, and I just want us to be in a position to enact this if the state doesn't do what we suspect. And we do suspect them to put a tax on it. But in what manner and where that puts us in the situation is unclear at this time. So in the meantime, I also want to thank finance. I want to thank law. I want to thank our treasurer, PLI. the administration, of course, and the controller's office where we've been having working group meetings for the past two or three weeks as to the challenges into how we collect this tax, how we implement this tax, and, you know, what challenges that we're going to face. So we don't have it all quite worked out, but we have a pretty good understanding that it's very doable on our part, providing that it's worthwhile, and that... All challenges could be overseen. We have a lot of things to work on still, but we're going to continue to go down that path to make sure that when the time comes, if we're in a position to implement this tax, that we will be able to and we will know exactly what direction to go. If not, then so be it. I still think from a personal level, it needs to be regulated i will tell you this industry needs to be regulated uh it's not we're not out to regulate it but if the state takes it up and it nullifies what we're trying to do that's fine and good because um across the board this really needs to be regulated if it means income coming into the state our job will then be to argue for the monies that we feel that you know the the businesses in the Pittsburgh area deserve. So we'll take that fight up, perhaps another trip to Harrisburg next year when things are more clear. So originally, like I said, we were trying to schedule this where we would be able to implement this and budget it for next year. And we're being conservative when I say two to three million dollars That's a conservative figure. I think if we're able to impose this tax like we want to do, I think it will mean much more than that. So originally we were trying to stay on schedule to impose it for next year so we could budget it in for next year's season. Being that the state now has four months to take this up, that kind of – puts a damper on that, so we're looking more towards 2028, I guess, to budget this for. But right now, we're in a wait and see, and if we pass this, then we're just going to have to wait and see what the state does and see if it nullifies or supersedes our decisions, and if it does, then that's okay, because at least the state's getting tax revenue from a... industry that really needs regulated so so with that said i'll try to answer any questions that you have and i apologize for moving quickly on this in terms of legislation and how it moves but we felt it important to get it done before july 1st and july 1st being the reason is because the state can go if they do impose a tax and we're still able to collect our uh you know um our tax they can go back to July 1st so we want to be in under that deadline originally I was trying to push the deadline so we could budget for next year but now it's become I want to push the deadline so we're under the under the you know threshold that we if so-called grandfathered in or you know whatever the state comes up to and again no tongue no no way of knowing what they're going to do so I thought it'd be prudent and not let a lot of hard work go to waste that we put in this for the last seven or eight months. And, you know, let's hope for the best. So with that, I will take any questions. And John Carter and my chief of staff, Blake Plavchak, are here, who did an extensive amount. And Dr. Rossiter is back there. And if you have any questions for them, we will call them to the table as well. So with that, I will turn it back to you, Madam Chair. Thanks.

Thank you. Councilman Cockle, I see an amendment before us. Would you like to take questions before the amendment or a motion to amend now?

Well, we could just go right back, right? I would like the motion to amend. And the amendment consists of we didn't want to penalize people who already have amusement arcade licenses. Meaning, for instance, a place down in Market Square, they may have 100 or 200 machines there, right? how many of those are skills games or not i'm not quite sure i i don't think many of them are so we didn't want to penalize the people who are in the business of amusement and arcade so we put a cap of 10 machines per class for somebody who has an amusement arcade and is already properly uh you know permitted to operate that way so motion to amend is there a second second discussion on the amendment

seeing none all in favor of amending bill 544 please say aye aye aye bill is amended further discussion on the bill as amended council member charlotte

Yeah, so I think I've made clear to this body, I really think these skill games are a pox on our neighbor. I feel them very similar to the vape shops that we're talking about, and often a vape shop has a skill game inside it. I think these are... Again, it is a predatory device, taking advantage of someone who is generally not having a good time. It's not like going to the casino where you go with your friends and you might like, hey, maybe gambling's not for me, but I'll blow a couple bucks here and have a good night out. If you go into a gas station, there's one on 18th and Arlington that I see all the time. There's someone just sitting there plugging and plugging away. And the amount of... of debt, of loss of life savings. I think these machines, my preference would be that we would outlaw them outside the city. I know that's not something we can do. If we can't do that, then my preference would be that we tax them out of existence. And then if not, I think this is our best alternative here. We should try to get the revenue that we can off of them. But I do hope that they're harder. I hope that this makes it harder to establish these throughout the whole city here. I see them, you know, and I have... Obviously a lot of bar owners that I talk to in my district. The bar owners are paid by the company to essentially rent space out of their establishment. Paysomatic will then collect the share of the revenue that they get out of these machines and generally share it with the establishment. But then they don't have controls on these devices. Brinks doesn't come up and pick up cash. If you talk to your police commander, almost all of our commanders will tell you about a story where the control of picking up the cash out of these Pace-O-Matic machines is... you know, like two guys in a minivan putting it in the back of their car. It's not like a security system. And so these things get robbed all the time. And it just, it generally is just not, I don't think, conducive to what we want to see in our city here. So... I do hope that the state acts swiftly. I know that this is their pressing issue going into their budget cycle, something that they're very concerned about. But it is my strong preference that we see less and less of these because I don't think they're conducive to a healthy city and to folks earning wealth and just a model that really just preys upon folks that don't need preyed upon. So, happy to support this, but I do, if we can send the message to Harrisburg, you know, I would really like to see PaySomatic out of the state here. Thank you.

Thank you. Further discussion? Second round, Councilman Coghill.

Thank you, Madam Chair. You know, I'm really glad you brought that up. My reasoning to pursue this tax was for additional revenue for the city of Pittsburgh, of course. But you're absolutely correct. I know firsthand many, many people. And people, you know, so you know, they call them nickel machines, and they used to anyway. But... Nichols don't go into them. People, many people, this is, like you said, it's really preying on an addiction. And people will throw their entire paycheck in a local supermarket that has one of these machines and not think twice about it. They'll stay there all day. It's usually the same people if you... pay attention to the ones that are in and around you. So it really is a predatory thing, I believe. I think, like you said, Councilman Sharland, if you want to gamble, go to the casino. At least you're going to lose your money and good surroundings and really nice atmosphere and maybe taking a show. So I I agree with you 100% in what you say, and yeah, whether it's us imposing, and to some degree, if we impose our tax, that might help regulate the small... operators probably, I don't know, maybe they could afford it, maybe they can't, but I would think it would weed some out. If the state imposes a tax, which they're talking about 52% of the revenue on the income of all those machines, the intake, and we're talking possibly up to a billion dollars for the state. So I don't think the state's going to miss the opportunity and And if that means, you know, we get our residual back to the city of Pittsburgh that we're setting out to do, and if it puts us in a better position to do so, to pass this, then that's kind of part of the, you know, plan here or part of the reasoning that I continue to pursue it. But I think the state will probably act on it. And if they can do that in regulating and getting a lot of the ones that are everywhere, pretty much everywhere, and preying on people, that's fine and good, too. So I won't be shedding any tears if the state acts. And as long as we get a financial benefit from it as a city of Pittsburgh, then all is good. So thank you.

Thank you. Seeing no further discussion, I will just quickly say I want to commend you, Councilman, for your work on this and your staff and other Councilmember sponsors. There were a lot of creative ideas that came out of our budget discussion last year around additional revenue, tax or non-taxable revenue. And oftentimes so many of the taxes that we impose, by no fault of our own, really because of regulations from the state, end up on the backs of taxpayers. property owners or renters. And this is one of the unique ones that isn't necessarily all on property owners. And so I really commend you for putting in the time and the work to consider a new type of tax. We hope that it does, you know, is allowable throughout whatever process the state lands on for their own tax and that this is additional revenue because, of course, we still are in dire financial position If you'd like to find out more about that, attend the post-agenda at 1.30 p.m. on the ACFER and Quarter 1 report, and we'll get into that more. It's my PSA for the day. But, yeah, I appreciate your work on this. This is a creative way to not only regulate what needs to be a regulated industry at the local level to the extent that we have any power over that, which is very little, but also additional revenue, large or small. So, appreciate it.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for your help in having the conversations with me throughout.

Thank you. Seeing no further discussion, all in favor of Bill 544 as amended, please say aye. Aye. Affirmative recommendation. And as a reminder, we will be at the end of this meeting, adjourning this meeting, and reconvening the recess meeting from yesterday to be able to take a final vote on this bill today, given the deadline that was discussed. New Papers, Bill 614.

Resolution further amending Resolution 834-2025 effective December 21st, 2025 as amended in title. Resolution adopting and approving the 2026 Capital Budget, the proposed 2026 Community Development Program and the 2026 through 2031 Capital Improvement Program by increasing facility improvements, sports facilities by $250,000 and increasing remediation of condemned buildings by $163,351. These changes are made in response to program allocations by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and come at no cost to the city.

Motion to approve. Second.

Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 614, please say aye. Aye. Affirmative recommendation. That moves us to Recreation, Youth, and Senior Services Committee, chaired by Councilmember Warwick.

Bill 643. Resolution authorizing the Mayor, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the Director of the Department of Parks and Recreation to issue requests for proposal for social services programming at the Bird Run Recreation Center and to enter into an agreement or agreements with qualified providers at a cost not to exceed $250,000.

Motion to approve discussion? Second. Discussion? Yeah, thank you. So, yeah, so this bill is focused on Bergwin Rec Center in Glen Hazel. So the situation that we are in with Bergwin Rec Center is that this was a building that originally was a pool building, right, where you could change your clothes and whatnot. When there used to be a pool up there, the pool was closed, filled up, a spray park was put in its place. And so this was just kind of an old and pretty dingy building, right? Just concrete floors. And for a number of years, a community group, Ms. Sandra Cole is here today, has run programming out of that building, right? After-school programming, summer programming, and football. Football and cheerleading, right? So basically, every day, 365, the community group was up there working out of this building, and it was essentially, and I appreciate Ms. Cole being here today, it was her and her son, James, running this programming. I actually used to volunteer as part of the program, that's how I got to know the building. And so about three years ago, we allocated funding to renovate the building because it really was kind of, I'll say yucky, right? Like the floor is just, you know, it was not really an appropriate building for having all these kids in just, and the upstairs couldn't be used, et cetera, et cetera. Three long years later, and the building is just about done, just about fully renovated. But in that time, circumstances have changed for the group, right? So Mr. Cole, who I have to say has dedicated his life to working in this space, there comes a point where you can't work for free anymore, right? So he is still doing the football, but he's made it clear that it's just no longer sustainable to be trying to operate all these programs for all of these kids on a shoestring budget, basically. So now we have a rec center with that is almost fully renovated and the doors are not going to open unless we are able to find some funding to have programming in this rec center. I recognize that we have other rec centers that in very similar situations, right, where there's program, one is Reem, one is McKinley, and there may be others. But the reality is that for too long, the city has grown accustomed to relying on the kindness of community members, often in our most underserved, poorest communities, to provide the services that we provide in communities where we have a rec center, right? We have 10 rec centers. One is McGee, also in my district, to provide those services essentially for free. And that is not equitable. And I feel like we are at a breaking point now, especially with funding drying up. We know that our foundations are less and less inclined every year to fund operations. They tend to want to fund more like one-off projects. So in the same way, so I believe, the solution, a longer-term solution, is for us to adequately fund our city parks, right? Because we know, when we are talking about kids and families and violence and vulnerable communities, we know that out-of-school programming, free, safe, reliable after-school programming and summer programming for our youngest residents builds stable communities. It helps stabilize families. It makes it so that parents know that their kid has somewhere safe to go if they are at work or whatnot. And if you compare it to another department, it would be absurd to think that you only get your streets salted if you happen to have a salt dome in your neighborhood. You only get garbage pickup if you happen to have like a garbage truck depot in your neighborhood. You only get DPW services if you happen to have a DPW division in your neighborhood, right? That's absurd. Our services are for everybody. All of our residents pay taxes. So it shouldn't depend on your neighborhood whether or not you have free after-school care and free summer programming, which we provide in our full-service rec centers. And I want to say, we provide very well. Those programs are great. I can speak from experience with McGee Rec. Those programs are outstanding. So I understand that we are not in a financial position to build rec centers in every single neighborhood, right? That's not realistic. I do think that we should renovate rec centers where we can, right? Where we have buildings that need no similar to what we've done at Berguin. But again, I understand that's a longer term endeavor. And I think it's something too that the administration is looking to do, by the way. I've heard the mayor talk about that numerous times. And we also don't need to displace existing programs. We have wonderful partners that provide this type of programming. The YMCA, the Boys and Girls Club, Center That Cares, the Pittsburgh Project. There are numerous organizations that have full-service after-school and summer programming. And they are excellent partners. But we need to make sure that this type of programming is available to everyone for the long term and I hope that you know when we get into budget season and we start talking about Parks and Rec and what we're going to do with Parks and Rec that this administration is ready to you know really think outside the box and instead of just you know praising our Parks and Rec department for how much they do with so little that we actually make the move here at the City of Pittsburgh to increase that funding and let them do the amazing work that they do and do more of it and do it for everybody. But that is a longer-term conversation. The short-term conversation right now for my district, for Glenn Hazel, is that We need this after-school care, and we need this summer programming. This bill simply authorizes an RFP and allows that money to be taken from the Stop the Violence account. It does not mandate it, right? It doesn't say that it has to be a full year. In a perfect world, I would like to see community members who want to do this work in Glen Hazel hired by the city. I'd like to see them have healthcare and a decent salary. That would be the perfect scenario in my mind, but I understand we're not in a place to do that right now. And at the minimum, that is a conversation for next year's budget. But what I need right now is I need those doors open when school starts, right? I need us not to have spent a million dollars on a rec center that we are unable to staff. And so we just have a community with a nice new rec center that nobody is able to use because there's nobody to staff it. So that's what this bill is about. I would love help with funding. I know the administration has some ideas about other ways that this could be funded. Absolutely, I am open to it. This bill is just about creating this option, right, if it is needed. And, you know, again, if they want to do six months and figure something out, whatever, right? That's not my role is to figure out the how. My role is to make sure that the administration has the funding that they need to be able to do this, right? And then the how is sort of the next step. So I'll, you know, happy to answer any questions that I can. I just wanted to kind of get my thought process down for this and help everyone understand what it is that I'm trying to do here. Thank you.

Further discussion? Council President Lavelle.

Very briefly, this is just a recommendation to the Councilwoman. In my experience over the years, when we issue an RFP that has a specific number in it, the responses always come back to that specific number. So I would simply recommend removing at a cost not to exceed $250,000. That's my personal recommendation because you could get the same service for 170 or maybe it comes back at 300. But I would simply remove that number so that when you get a response, you're getting the most appropriate response.

So just interrogatory, I don't, so without the, oh, and I also need to amend, by the way, because it was supposed to be $200, not $250, but I guess I'm not clear, without a dollar amount, how the money is sort of, how the administration is allowed to tap into the money without the vote on a not-to-exceed amount. You see what I'm saying? I mean, without sort of saying, this money here is allowed for you to use this from this account.

Interrogatory?

Yeah.

I'm thinking it through. My understanding is, and this could certainly be worked out for next week, that you could say to be taken from, and then you have to put the JD number of the account in.

That is, that is.

So you wouldn't, you wouldn't have the dollar amount, but rather you'd be saying to me, this has to be taken from this account. And then there will be a second step where then once they were prepared to remove, take those dollars out, they would then have to send another authorizing piece of legislation to council to actually expend those dollars. If that makes sense.

Yeah, I mean, I hear you. It's just confusing because I understand there's this stop the violence plan that we don't vote on, right? And so I just... I feel more comfortable because, again... without being prescriptive about that. For all I know, the administration may say, hey, we just wanna do something for three months, right, while we figure something out, right? That's why I wanna give them, so maybe it's, and this sort of gives them, I mean, I don't want to say 500,000 because that does seem like too much for a year. I mean, I kind of did a back of the napkin assessment with like one full-timer and like three part-time, you know what I mean? And what it would be for summer and some supplies and things like that. So this was just sort of a back of the napkin estimate based on some city parks programming that we do, right? And what that costs. So that, I mean, that's just my thought there. I just, I would like to keep the dollar amount in there too. And oh, by the way, and I also should motion to amend, to amend it to 200. Second.

We have a motion to amend and a second. Discussion on the amendment? Councilman Wilson.

Yeah, I just – I think this is – I do have some background information I'm trying to understand. But in terms – you're trying to make an amendment now for the dollars. So I think this is poorly written, the way it exists, because, you know, we had a comp plan that we said, you know, we have $6 million to spend on a comp plan. We went out. Well, guess what? We put out the RFP. The people that responded to it. put the max dollar amount so i mean not only will we i mean we're just way ahead of i think what we're trying to do here um and to not only to put the dollar amount but we're literally amending the dollar amount at council i mean we're obviously going to get something back that's going to say it's going to cost us 200 000 and you know i just i have you know a pause about just privatizing like you know These this type of work in our centers. I feel like there should have been a plan. There was $1,000,000 spent where was. And that was under the past administration. So what? But some of the background I need I need is why wasn't this thought out from the beginning if? Because I'm going through this with Cali Rec Center and we're trying to understand if we're going to invest all this money in here, will this be staff? So number one, I don't understand that if there was $1,000,000 spent. Why does this seem like an emergency right now to get something in there? Like, why wasn't this thought out prior? I have that question. But then also, I don't think this is properly written to actually use taxpayer dollars appropriately because we're obviously going to get back saying we need $200,000 to run this program. And also, I think you should work with the administration to really get this figured out. I mean, they have the authorization to put out an RFP. They don't need, you know, we do these things at council, but I understand this is like, you know, you saying that this is what my community needs, but I mean, they have the authorization. If you work with them on something, maybe something could be accomplished. So just that one question, though, the interrogatory about the, you know, this, like, why wasn't this thought out prior? Why does it feel like some sort of emergency right now.

Well, so again, as a city, we have been relying and continue to rely on community groups to do work for free out of our buildings. Sometimes I think with an understanding that we're somehow doing them a favor by providing the building.

There's community centers that are staffed.

Yes, I know that there's... So that's my point. So if you have a staffed community center in your neighborhood, then you have free after-school care, free summer programming, right, available to your, you know, within walking distance of your home. If you don't have a community center, then... you might, you might have nothing, right? But you also might have a community group that is, and some of those groups have lots of money and lots of funding, and that's great, and others don't. The circumstance here changed. It took three years to renovate this building. And, you know, I don't know the details of funding and, you know, what has happened and whatnot with, you know, I can't speak to that. But what I can speak to is that the community group that for years has been providing after school care and summer programming out of this building is no longer able to do so. I mean, and so that's why, and look, If I had my, you know, if I could just wave a wand, I would say, great, give it, you know what I mean? But that's not how it works, right? I can't do, we can't do that at council. We have RFPs, we have a process we have to go through. That's just how things are, right? So that for me is, this is, again, I'll say it again, is the urgency is there. And this for me is a means of giving the administration an option right, out of Stop the Violence Fund. If they can find another way to do it, I am open, right? I'm happy for whatever they can do to make this work. But what I need to see is urgency around getting getting something in place so that when school starts, the kids in this community are able to have adults working in their rec center and have a meal and have help with their homework and all the things that they have had for the past years.

no you may not at this time i'm sorry um there is uh i will just sorry was that where you finished or did you have further comment just interjecting i know we have council person charlotte who would like to say something that uh i did just get confirmation that regardless of whether the 250 or 200 000 is included in this or not we would also need to pass separate legislation to uh authorize expenditure of the funds so even if whether it's here whether it stays as is whether it changes to 200 or or not We would still need to pass separate legislation to expend it. That's where I hadn't considered what Council President Lavelle had mentioned prior to this, which is why it didn't come up in our conversations, but I think that the... In the interest of fiscal responsibility not putting a price on the RFP just in case we can get something that comes in far lower like if someone could provide the services for a hundred thousand for the timeframe we're looking for that would be that would make a lot more sense for the purposes of RFP, choose the organization, and then a separate piece of legislation that we will need anyway to authorize the expenditure. So that would be my preference. But yeah, that's my point. I'll turn it over to Councilperson Chartland.

Yes, and I want to start off with just a quick interrogatory. Where does this, if allowed, Councilman Warrick, where does this GDE number correspond to?

The Stop the Violence. The Stop the Violence.

So we're taking money out of the Stop the Violence. Again, though, the Stop the Violence money that is not allocated, the same issue with the Learn to Earn program, that this money has not been allocated out of the Stop the Violence plan. Correct. Yeah.

Yeah.

Okay, so... Again, I'm all for having a bigger discussion about what I guess I've recently in the last couple days been calling our quasi-rec centers. I have one. I have the exact same situation in Bell Tuber. We renovated a shelter house over the last couple years. There's a... entirely private programming that is run out of there, run by the neighborhood. They do not receive, they've never received stop-the-violence money. They do not receive city funding. Up until recently, they didn't receive toilet paper from the city. They didn't receive any city services. We're still negotiating a lease to try to figure out if the city can provide the special cleaning services detergent that is needed to clean the basketball courts um so I'm all for having that discussion I can't support this today without having a a bigger conversation about how we're going to manage these quasi rec centers I know that I'm not that that you and I are not the only two members that have have these throughout the city I don't know where all the others are uh well I I do know um Mr. John, yeah, runs one in Mount Washington as well. And I'm sure there's others that exist. If that's where we'd like to go with this, I'm happy to go in that direction. But this today, I can't support because I don't know how it will impact my district and Voice Against Violence and Richard Carrington and Vaughn Madden and the folks that run the programming out of there. throughout the summer and throughout the school year. So happy to entertain that, but that is a bigger, longer process than just voting or telling the administration, we'd like to see you issue an RFP and they can decide whether or not they're going to do that. I'd rather have the bigger process of what does this look like citywide for these quasi rec centers that we do have and are really important in all of our neighborhoods here. So that's where I stand today.

Further discussion? Councilwoman Salinatro.

Yeah, after listening to everyone's conversations, I have a similar situation, only it's fully manned right now, but they're not being paid. My question is... Why does this money have to come from Stop the Violence Grant? Could it have come from a different source? Was this something that we looked at for a different source and we're just choosing that? For what reason? That's my question now is why Stop the Violence Grant if we still haven't had this overall conversation about how we're going to spend down that money. So that's my question.

Yes, so I chose the Stop the Violence Fund to do an RFP out of the Stop the Violence Fund because there is $10 million in the Stop the Violence Fund that is unencumbered right now, right? That is not assigned to anything. there's not, I mean, otherwise, there's not, you know, this is not a capital project, so it's not like I can just move my, you know what I mean? Like I could just go to DPW and be like, hey, do you have any money extra on this thing or whatever? I would like to actually call Sean Carter up because he helped write the legislation. I don't know if there's any clarification. This was mirroring, because we are moving a million dollars out of Stop the Violence into learn and earn right um without the broader discussion about how stop the violence should you know that which we started to have um but that is why i was my hope is that members can understand the urgency in this situation that the administration have access to these stop the violence dollars to get this work done i don't want to have a mandate to the administration um without some money that they can use to execute, right? Otherwise, we're just, as council members, we're just complaining, I think. If we don't identify, I mean, that's our job, right? Is to identify funding. And so that is what I'm trying to do here. I'm trying to create an option for this very You know, the larger discussion is going to take some time, right? The larger discussion is going to be something that we look at, I think, probably going into budget conversations next year. Anyway, I'll let Mr. Carter comment.

Thank you. Good morning, Councilwoman, and good morning, members. There were some questions I heard during the discussion of this bill, and we'll start with Council President Lavelle's and the not-to-exceed amount. Typically, the reason for not to exceed amount is to prevent sort of a runaway, open-ended authorization where people are just spending money because it's authorized, but there's no cap, there's no limit. But that limit does not mean that the RFP that an administration issues subsequently would tap the full amount. They could, but they may not. They may find that they only need $125,000, and so they issue the RFP at a cost of $125,000. Now, they could go up. That's their option. Also, to the point, the administration does not need counsel to authorize the issuance of an RFP. They do, however, need counsel's authorization to execute a contract. But this isn't the first time counsel has legislated Basically, the issuance of an RFP. It's still going to be up to the administration whether they issue the RFP. But these are just sort of the basic parameters for that RFP. And yeah, that was my answer about that. There's another question. I'm still here.

So, you know, I'm a little disappointed here and my fellow members because I feel like if this were in your district, right, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. But I would like to motion to hold for two weeks so that I can yet again go back to Hazelwood and make people come down here and beg you for this. Beg you and beg this administration to act urgently to open up this rec center. Because we did not have summer programming. That was not anyone's fault. That was very last minute. But it was my office that scrambled to make sure just that we had lunches. All right? So the urgency here is mine and the community that I represent.

So I guess I'm going to motion to hold for two weeks.

And I'm going to have to go out to my community. And I'm going to have to knock doors. And I will do it. I've done it before.

We'll be back. Two weeks, we'll be back. Let's go. We will be back. I'm just saying that. And guess what? Sandra Paul always went.

I understand that. Check my record. Y'all don't understand what's going on in the community. But if it was a white community, it would be okay.

Okay? It's not a white community. It's a black community. And we need a little bit of help to reach and get it. Okay? So hear me when I tell you, we will be back.

So at any rate, with that, I would like to please motion to hold. Oh, sorry. Well, motion to amend. The motion to amend.

The motion to amend has been seconded. Yeah. And that's under discussion. um all in favor of amending bill do you wish to move forward with the amendment yes because the type i was just a typo to have 250 it should have been 200. all in favor of amending bill 643 please say aye aye aye bill has been amended bill as amended yeah thank you and then i'd like to motion to hold for two weeks second

Council Member Gross. Thank you. I listened to members' comments, and I kind of heard, I think, one thing that I took issue with is that We shouldn't move forward with a small expenditure without having a discussion about kind of all of the facilities and all of the programs. And I don't think that it's an either or. Certainly, if there's a situation where a summer program can be ramped up, we can do that. And we absolutely also need... to have a larger discussion about where more programming is needed and what kinds of resources we can do. If we can't fully fund, can we partially fund? Can we provide supplies? Can we treat a basketball court that needs to be treated that's our facility? And I am absolutely willing to do that as well, and I think that should be our top priority. So again, similar to the other conversation about Partners for Work and providing year-round employment opportunities, I think this is the important and urgent work that the communities want us to do. So I'm absolutely, you know, eager to have that conversation as well. So thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Further discussion on the motion to hold? Councilman Cockhill.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Councilwoman, I want to tell you, I really respect your passion, and when you called me on this last week, it seemed like a perfectly fine idea to me, and I was initially supportive, right? I'm still supportive, and I'm supportive of trying to find you any which way in working in coordination with the administration to find you a way to make sure you have programming in that new facility, because If there's one thing that is unacceptable is rehabbing a facility and not having the programming for the kids to be in it. So you have my commitment on that. Since, you know, I've had many conversations with many people, I do worry, I do tend, one thing that sticks out to me is almost like, we were to approve this almost like a money grab from me I will tell you you know I start thinking of things like yeah I'd like to use some of that stop the violence funds for things in my district you know so I do feel like we need to regulate it or talk about the guidelines and you know the proper procedure moving forward so We'll talk over the next couple weeks, but, you know, I am committed to finding you the funds, whichever way we can find them, that's proper, without questions, that has arisen as far as the Stop the Violence funds go. And, yeah, so I look forward to those conversations.

Council Member Warwick. I do want to just say, with regard to Hazelwood in general, Glenn Hazel, in the 90s, in Hazelwood, there were shootings almost every weekend. And over the past 10 years, 20 years, through the incredible work, not of this city, but of the community groups, who work there and who live there, right, that violence has significantly dropped to the point that I think last summer, I don't think that there were any fatal shootings last summer. And now this summer, the kids in that community do not have any summer programming, right? There's one program which is for very young kids that is full with a wait list. And the community of Glen Hazel has no programming. So I think just the idea that this is like, that I'm trying to just like snatch some money out of Stop the Violence Fund, you know, that shouldn't be used for, that isn't like in line with the purpose of the Stop the Violence Fund is not accurate. Anyway, so I'll just leave it at that with a motion to hold. I have some work cut out from my staff and I over the next two weeks.

Further discussion on the motion to hold? Seeing none, all in favor of a two-week hold on bill, on amended bill 643, please say aye. Aye. Bill will be held. That moves us to Innovation Performance Asset Management and Technology Committee, chaired by Councilwoman Gross.

Supplemental New Papers, Bill 670, Resolution Amending, Resolution 182 of 2026, authorizing and instructing the Department of Innovation and Performance to publish and submit a report on surveillance technology so as to extend the deadline for the presentation of the report to City Council to September 2, 2026.

Motion to approve? Brief discussion? Second. Discussion? Thank you all. So you'll recall that we are due a report from Innovation and Performance on our privacy protections and surveillance technology guidelines. There's been several different sets of... City Council acted on this over the years and we're working on them. This one is just providing an extension. I had to bring it back as an amendment to the previous bill, to the previous resolution to give us an extension to just after recess. So we can still expect the report, but we're giving an extension to after recess.

Thank you. Further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 670, please say aye. Aye. Affirmative recommendation. That moves us to Intergovernmental and Educational Affairs Committee, chaired by Councilman Mosley.

Deferred Papers, Bill 224, resolution authorizing the Mayor, Director of Public Works, and the Director of Finance to enter into an easement agreement or agreements with the Allegheny County Sanitary Authority for the installation of certain monitoring boreholes on city-owned parcels 121H20, 82H102, and 48H200 at no cost to the city.

Motion to hold for a cablecast public hearing. Second.

Oh, we have an amendment here.

Actually, I have an amendment by substitution, Councilman.

Okay. Motion to amend by substitution.

Second. May I discuss?

Yeah, so we have a motion and a second. Second.

Yes. Thank you. So these are the boring holes for the deep drop shops. And so thank you to Elkasan for not only doing a site visit, working with community groups. Thank you to everybody who followed up, the administration, the chief assistant. operating officer with the administration we are it's an amendment by substitution because we had to they are um not going to do there were four in the original legislation they are they've changed their mind about one of the locations and then two of the locations we are moving forward and i'm also addressing the board member here for augustine thank you councilman selva netro and then the fourth one we're still working on um is that like at a city playground and so there's a lot of concerns and i want to thank um chief gilman also for working on that one and so alpha san has just suggested that we keep working on that location um and so what we're doing is moving forward two of the locations Thank you.

Thank you. Further discussion on the proposed amendment by substitution? Seeing none, all in favor of amending Bill 224 by substitution, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Bill has been amended. Councilman Mosley.

Now a motion to hold a cablecast public hearing.

Oh, I'm sorry. I think you might be looking at your next paper.

Really?

We're at 0224, which is the top of the page.

Oh, I'm sorry. My apologies. Yeah, I'm sorry.

I don't think Alka-San would want that. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Thank you.

Thank you for catching that.

My apologies.

So any further discussion on the bill as amended? Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 224, please say aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation. New papers, Bill 606.

Thank you for catching that, Councilwoman.

Bill 606, resolution requesting the approval of an intermunicipal transfer of a liquor license from McCrossings Landing Pub, LLC, located at 13 Edsel Lane, Monongahela, PA, to the applicant, Silver Ashes Hospitality Group, LLC, located at 728 Copeland Street, pursuant to amended Pennsylvania Liquor Code 4-461.

Now, motion to hold for a cablecast public hearing.

Second. Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of holding Bill 606 for a cablecast public hearing, please say aye. Aye. Bill will be held. Bill 613.

Resolution adopting plan revision to the City of Pittsburgh's official sewage facilities plan for Simmons Residential Development at 5429 Dunmoyle Street at no cost to the City.

Motion to approve. Second.

Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of Bill 613, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Affirmative recommendations.

Yeah.

We are now to motions and resolutions. Councilman Gross.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Members, if I didn't, I talked to some members, and if I didn't, we've been working together, Councilman Wilson, Councilman Coghill and I, with planning and zoning, and I'm going to motion to bring back to the table the short-term rental zoning bill. If you remember, we had two companion pieces. Last week, we just held the licensing piece again. And in working with Planning and Zoning, and I want to, again, appreciate so much their feedback, is that we were trying to make the permission to have a short-term rental in a residential neighborhood if you weren't you know even living in the state right you're just using this as a scattered site hotel and you're just kind of using a a city home as as income as a commercial entity practically um harder than renting out your home if you live in it but and they actually told us that we hadn't made it hard enough it would still be too easy and there wouldn't actually be the kind of public process that we We're trying to achieve. And so we've got an amendment. So with that, I will motion to rescind the February 11, 2026 motion that referred Bill 2026-0009 to the Planning Commission. Second. Second. Thank you. So we need to put on that.

Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of the motion to rescind, please say aye.

Aye. And then, so motion to approve Bill 2026-0009. I need a second. Second.

We think we need a motion.

Well, to discuss, right? That's how we usually discuss. Then I'm going to motion to amend. Or I can just stay motion to amend if you prefer.

It needs to be brought to the table first. Well, you've got to read the bill, I think.

Oh, thank you. I didn't have that in my notes, Sean. Sean gave me my talking points. Ready to go. Thank you. I thought there was something. I do remember calling this before. There he is.

This doesn't have that offer.

Here he is. No, that's okay. Motion to bring to the table Bill 0009. Second. Thank you. Now can I, should I motion to amend or motion to approve?

I need to read it first.

Oh, I apologize. Thank you.

Bill 2026-0009, Ordinance Amending the Pittsburgh Zoning Code, excuse me, Title IX, Zoning, Article V, Use Regulations, Chapter 911, Primary Uses, Chapter 912, Accessory Uses and Structures to Add Short-Term Rental Regulations.

Is that the whole point? And thanks to all of our parliamentarians who support us in these complicated Roberts rules. So a motion to amend.

Second.

And again, just briefly, you have the yellow. It's actually a motion to amend by substitution, if I could correct that. So I put a second on that.

Second.

Second. Apologize. So we have the yellow copy in front of us, and you can see in the use table that it just strikes out the special exception that we had in the first place. And so that's it. That's all we're doing today.

All right. So we have a motion to amend by substitution. Councilman Wilson.

All right. I just want to thank everyone that was involved in the process. I know that... Short-term rental has been talked about for quite some time, and I know my communities are looking for an update on where this bill is. And so if you don't mind, I'd like to, you know, thanks to the primary sponsor and, you know, as a co-sponsor and I guess the Councilman Coggo as well, you know, I just wanted to go through what we're doing here. i thought i did but yeah sometimes i'm too well i guess i wanted to say it like directly that uh you know for too long these you know if we go back even before i was on council council people here were working on how to limit short-term rentals in you know just in general like put uh guidelines and parameters around That use and so I I think that you know getting to where we are, where we are creating the use and it is going through zoning and there is a license that will be attached to it, which is held right now. We want that to align with the bill when it comes back. I just want to say for the record that. You know, obviously it's no. It's no secret that in my district that in several others, but in my district there was. The most violent. episodes that have played out. So it's more than just trash. We're talking about actual deadly parties. And for us to get to a place where we are restricting, we are not allowing the use, we are not allowing short-term rentals to be in residential neighborhoods. So similar to the The vape shop bill, we're telling the STR owners where they can be in the future. So it's clearly laid out here in this table, but I just think it has to be said that really not permitting that use in residential areas I think is critical. There's enough Airbnbs and verbos and different companies that have short-term rentals and they you know time and time again they have shown that they're not good partners in our resident in our residential neighborhoods so in our communities they're just not good partners And we need to limit that as much as possible. And I think this bill does a great job of seeking to do that. So thank you.

Thank you. Councilman Coghill.

Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to thank you, Councilwoman Gross, for your leadership on this. And you too, Councilman Wilson, as to... You know, the different experiences and different reasons why we got this to this point. So I'm in full agreement with my two lead sponsors here. You know, we've had a shooting in my district. We've had a couple shootings in the Airbnbs. And beyond that, you know, when we talk about the city of Pittsburgh being 20,000 houses short of, you know, affordable housing and, you know, this really does have an impact on that, I feel. You know, I think there are LLCs that own... Duplicate many, many homes in my residential neighborhood used just for Airbnbs. And it really tears apart the fabric in the neighborhood. You no longer have any neighbors. You have people flying in from different parts of the country every week. So I think restricting them to the... to the properly zoned areas. Is it a smart and a right thing to do? And again, I just want to thank the sponsors and I appreciate council support for this. I think it'll go a long way in solving what, you know, again, is a problem and an issue. So thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Further discussion? Councilperson Charlene.

Kind of a point of order here. Is the plan here that we're sending this to the Planning Commission?

Yes. We're going to send it back to Planning.

We're sending this to Planning.

Okay. And I just also wanted to say, because I forgot to and was reminded this morning, we had voted to send it to Planning and then held it, and then this is now amending, having it amended, then resending it, like another motion to send it to Planning.

Okay. Okay.

I believe that's what the process was. Okay. So we have the amendment to be voted on. Further discussion on the bill as amended by substitution? Seeing none, all in favor of amending by substitution Bill 2026-9, please say aye. Aye.

And now we'd like to motion to hold for report and recommendation from the Planning Commission. Second.

Discussion? Seeing none, all in favor to send to Planning Commission, please say aye. Aye.

Aye.

The bill will be sent for report and recommendation to Planning Commission. That exhausts our Standing Committee's agenda. We do have meeting announcements. This afternoon, in about an hour, 1.30, Council will hold a cablecast post agenda on the ACFER and first quarter 2026 financial and performance report that I will share. Thursday, June 25th at 1.30 p.m., Council will hold a cablecast public hearing on Bill 531, the Downtown Pittsburgh Transit Revitalization Investment District Implementation Plan. Speaker registration will close at 11.30 a.m. Next week, Council will hold their regular meeting on Tuesday, June 30th. and their standing committee's meeting on Wednesday, July 1st, both at 10 a.m. Speaker registration will close at 9 a.m. Tuesday and Wednesday mornings. To register to speak at any of these meetings, please complete the sign-up form on the council meeting webpage or contact the clerk's office at 412-255-2138 by the applicable registration deadline. Is there anything further from members? Councilman Mosley.

Yeah, I would like to thank everyone that has been involved with the street team in the East End and partaking in this weekend's launch on Broad Street between Highland and Center Avenue. I also want to thank my esteemed colleague, Councilwoman Strasburger, for her partnership in our work to make the East Liberty Business District safer, as well as some of the other locations throughout the greater East Liberty area that have been sites of flash crowd disturbances and other incidents, particularly involving our youth. I also want to thank the HEAR Foundation, East Liberty Chamber of Commerce, IO, Jay Locke and Boaz from the street team and the many others who have reached out to become part of this very large and growing coalition. We will be on Broad Street. It will be blocked off between Highland and Center between 1 p.m. and 6 p.m. this Saturday. So please come out. There's going to be dozens of organizations with a lot of resources and programming for young people. So it's not just about interrupting violence, but it's also providing young people with third spaces and programming around the East End. And we're really looking forward to this partnership. And I can't forget our good friends at Zone 5, led by Commander Hoyson, who has also played a major part in this partnership. And now We're acting. Commander Perry from Zone 4 is also a part of it. As many people don't know, the Market District and the new Meridian, which is obviously many consider to be a celebrity, is actually Shadyside and Zone 4. So this is a broad-ranging collaboration across communities in the East End that we're really excited to launch this weekend. So I just wanted to give a shout-out to everyone who's been a part of these conversations over many months as we prepare to get ready for this weekend.

Thank you. Congratulations in advance. I've seen the work that's gone into this and from your staff and from everyone and the way that the community is really wrapping their arms around the youth and this effort and to The East Liberty Chamber of Commerce saying, how do we get jobs, how do we offer jobs, and how do we make this a family fun fair that then launches into an opportunity for almost like learn and earn is really, really impressive. So I think it could potentially be a model for other neighborhoods and excited to see where this goes. Commending you and your staff for all your work on this.

Thank you for your partnership in this because it's very important to have you at the table.

Any further discussion? Seeing none, I will take a motion to, well, just a reminder, after this, we will adjourn. Please don't go far. We will take a short break and then reconvene our regular meeting from yesterday in just a few moments. So please don't go far. But I will take a motion to approve the minutes and adjourn the meeting.

So moved.

Is there a second?

Second.

All in favor? Aye. Meeting is adjourned.

And we'll just do the reconvening from our current seat.

Thank you. you

Welcome back to the reconvened regular meeting of City Council on Wednesday, June 24th, 2026. Will the clerk please take the roll?

Mr. Sharland? Here. Mr. Coghill? Here. Ms. Gross?

Here.

Mr. Mosley? Here. Ms. Salinetro?

Here.

Ms. Warwick? Here. Mr. Wilson?

Here.

Ms. Strasberger? Here. Mr. Lavelle, Chair? Here. Eight members present.

Thank you. Our next order of business is reports of committee for final action, beginning with Councilman Bobby Wilson, President of the Committee of Land Use and Economic Development. Thank you, Mr. President.

Bill 671, reported to Committee on Land Use and Economic Development for June 24, 2026, with an affirmative recommendation. Bill 426, Ordinance Amending and Supplementing the Pittsburgh City Code, Title II, Fiscal, Article IX, Property Taxes, by creating a new Chapter 269, Real Estate Tax Exemption, for construction or adaptive reuse of buildings on Pittsburgh's north side. bill 544 ordinance amending and supplementing the Pittsburgh code of ordinances title 7 business licensing article 9 amusement businesses with a new chapter chapter 774 mechanical amusement devices tax and licenses you've heard the reading inside the bills or any discussion on the bill

Seeing none, the bill is not ready for final action. All in favor of the passage of the bill will vote aye. Those opposed will vote no. Will the clerk please take the roll? Mr. Charlotte? Aye.

Mr. Coghill? Aye. Ms. Gross? Aye. Mr. Mosley? Aye. Ms. Salinetro? Aye. Ms. Warwick? Aye. Mr. Wilson? Aye. Ms. Strasburger? Aye. Mr. LaValle, Chair?

Aye.

Ayes 8, noes 0.

The bill, having received a legally required number of votes, is passed finally. With that, I think it takes us to the motion of resolutions. Anything from members?

If not, motion to... No, I just wanted to say, I will have a briefing for council members once we figure out how we're going to implement and, you know... The process that we're going to have to go through in order to collect this tax, but so perhaps in a couple weeks or so once we find something out. So thank you.

Thank you. Anything from other members? If not, motion to approve. Well, we have one member not here. Motion to excuse the absent member, approve the minutes, and adjourn the meeting.

So moved. Second.

All in favor say aye. Aye. We are adjourned.

Thank you.