Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I just posted the following on the Pgh Baby Boomer Leaving thread, and started thinking that there was so much content in the city controller's essay, that I referenced, that perhaps others might be interested in the broader topic( rather than only information regarding the 5 to 15 year old comments).
So, below is my reply from that thread which has the link to the article. Perhaps this new thread will afford others the opportunity to read Mr. Lamb's essay, if they are interested, in case they don't see the baby boomer thread
Per the city controller, Michael Lamb, "Pittsburgh is the No. 1 city in the world for having the lowest proportion of 5- to 15-year-olds."
That quote was from a piece Mr. Lamb authored for the Post Gazette, which appeared on June 9, 2016. The full paragraph which led to that statement, above, was: "Over the last 50 years, we have lost more than half of our population. For a city whose operations are funded primarily by the people who live here, that can’t be a good thing and it is reflected in the state of our infrastructure, our housing stock and the quality of our public services. The fact is that, when people make decisions about where to live, they tend to make smart decisions and right now, for most families, the city of Pittsburgh is not the smart choice. While it has lifted our collective psyche to be included on so many national “Best Places” lists, little is noted of this one: Pittsburgh is the No. 1 city in the world for having the lowest proportion of 5- to 15-year-olds. What does that say about our future?
The essay was quite informative and well written and included, as issues, many of the topics that are fanatically and chaotically argued on this forum. (As an example, some, but not all: admitting problems; the safety of city living; unaffordability of the city; the city schools being out-performed by the suburban districts; myriad top 10 lists; ETC)
His facts and concern for the issues are indisputable as he is the controller after all. His points and perspective make great sense and he does mention more than once how unwise it is to keep heads in the sand and avoid those very facts and issues, despite their being unflattering or problematic.
The city has geared itself to the 20s crowd since the late 00s. This Youth Movement is a result of high COL and urban development aimed at being the next Brooklyn. It's why we have so many renters.
Per the city controller, Michael Lamb, "Pittsburgh is the No. 1 city in the world for having the lowest proportion of 5- to 15-year-olds."
His facts and concern for the issues are indisputable as he is the controller after all. His points and perspective make great sense and he does mention more than once how unwise it is to keep heads in the sand and avoid those very facts and issues, despite their being unflattering or problematic.
lol. he's wrong, according to the census bureau. and not even close, it's not even true for only major cities in the US, let alone the world , and smaller cities. oh but it's INDISPUTABLE, because he's the controller. I am sure every rational person on here must think you are either joking or the world's biggest goofball. or maybe you are Michael Lamb?
I'd argue that the desire so many seem to have for the "good old days" is a bigger problem than whatever population decline may be taking place in the city. The economy of Pittsburgh has revitalized itself 100x better than comparable Rust Belt cities have, and any economy in the United States built primarily on heavy industry is never going to be the same with the outsourcing of these industries to cheaper labor in other countries. In addition, Pittsburgh hasn't had the same influx of immigrants from Latin countries that so many places in the US have had, something that's not likely to change in the absence of a need for cheap labor.
Those who start threads like this should look around at other similarly-situated cities like Cleveland and Detroit and Buffalo and Baltimore.
I'd argue that the desire so many seem to have for the "good old days" is a bigger problem than whatever population decline may be taking place in the city. The economy of Pittsburgh has revitalized itself 100x better than comparable Rust Belt cities have, and any economy in the United States built primarily on heavy industry is never going to be the same with the outsourcing of these industries to cheaper labor in other countries. In addition, Pittsburgh hasn't had the same influx of immigrants from Latin countries that so many places in the US have had, something that's not likely to change in the absence of a need for cheap labor.
Those who start threads like this should look around at other similarly-situated cities like Cleveland and Detroit and Buffalo and Baltimore.
So Pittsburgh shouldn't try to take a realistic look at these issues because other cities that have developed in similar economic/historic ways have worse problems than Pittsburgh does? The condition of Cleveland, Baltimor, Detroit and Buffalo has nothing to do with the looming problems faced by Pittsburgh. Saying that we're better off than those cities does nothing to solve the problems Pittsburgh faces.
But do you think anyone would run in the primary against Peduto? Do you think the Democratic Committee would endorse anyone other than the incumbent?
My theory is:
Peduto runs for re-election. Receives immediate Democratic Committee endorsement. Winds handily. Only groups who seem to oppose him are members of police and firefighters' unions (and their allies) and the yinzers who think bike lanes are Satan "cuz why don't those bikes have license plates like me?" He even has great approval ratings in the African-American community, despite current tensions regarding impending gentrification in the East End. I have a lot of Millennial friends, and we all love him. There are recent "good news" announcements in Sheraden, Beechview, Brookline, Troy Hill, Allentown, and even Homewood, so you can't really say he's "ignoring" the non-favored quarter of the city anymore.
Four years later he announces he is not going to seek a third term. His protege, Councilman Dan Gilman (who was Peduto's chief of staff when HE was the city councilman in that district), announces his candidacy, and Peduto endorses him. Michael Lamb or Jack Wagner run against Gilman. Both lose. Michael Lamb attempts to run a negative campaign that turns people off. Jack Wagner fails to appear "in touch" with the growing younger population in this city, despite the best efforts of his niece, Chelsa Wagner, which is why Peduto beat him the first time around. Josh Wander makes another laughable attempt at running on the Republican ticket from his new home in Israel, saying "I'll move back if you vote for me".
I'm friends on social media with Dan Gilman and think he'd make an excellent eventual successor to Peduto after his first two terms are complete. He's a junior-level councilman, but he's more vocal and seems to be more "involved" than my own junior-level councilwoman, Deb Gross. He's learning the ropes quickly. Gross was here in Polish Hill once that I can recall to help with a clean-up day, and she was also in front of Immaculate Heart of Mary Church, our polling precinct, asking my partner to vote for her a couple of years ago. I haven't heard a peep out of her since, and she's not very active on social media.
Out of all current city council members Gilman seems like he'd be one of the only ones with mayoral aspirations. Kail-Smith is chummy with me, too, but said she is happiest being a city councilwoman. Harris isn't going to seek re-election (thank God), so maybe the North Side can look forward to more progress with someone less obstructionist at the helm. She seems to be very opposed to any project in her district that will be urbane, cosmopolitan, and/or increase density, despite the fact that half her district is the very urban Lower North Side. I think Rudiak is great mayoral material, but I also don't know if she'd be up for the task, especially due to a recent tragic death in her family. She seems too "sweet" for a mayoral job that would come with a lot of vinegar being tossed in her direction. Burgess comes off almost as polarizing to me as Harris. Lavelle seems like he'd be mayoral material, but I don't know if he'd run. Corey O'Connor would be my second guess as to another councilman who might consider a future mayoral bid besides Gilman. I doubt Bruce Kraus would consider running. Given how quiet Gross has been I don't think she'd have any "oomph" behind a mayoral bid.
Last edited by SteelCityRising; 06-29-2016 at 01:07 PM..
My theory is:
Peduto runs for re-election...
Four years later he announces he is not going to seek a third term.
Why wouldn't he run for re-election? He has a pretty sweet gig - big fish in a small pond and he gets to gallivant all over the world on others' dime.
There's no way he'd win an election for County Executive or for Governor - so where do you see him going? Trying to challenge Mike Doyle for a House seat??
Peduto runs for re-election. Receives immediate Democratic Committee endorsement. Winds handily. Only groups who seem to oppose him are members of police and firefighters' unions (and their allies) and the yinzers who think bike lanes are Satan "cuz why don't those bikes have license plates like me?" He even has great approval ratings in the African-American community, despite current tensions regarding impending gentrification in the East End. I have a lot of Millennial friends, and we all love him. There are recent "good news" announcements in Sheraden, Beechview, Brookline, Troy Hill, Allentown, and even Homewood, so you can't really say he's "ignoring" the non-favored quarter of the city anymore.
Four years later he announces he is not going to seek a third term. His protege, Councilman Dan Gilman (who was Peduto's chief of staff when HE was the city councilman in that district), announces his candidacy, and Peduto endorses him. Michael Lamb or Jack Wagner run against Gilman. Both lose. Michael Lamb attempts to run a negative campaign that turns people off. Jack Wagner fails to appear "in touch" with the growing younger population in this city, despite the best efforts of his niece, Chelsa Wagner, which is why Peduto beat him the first time around. Josh Wander makes another laughable attempt at running on the Republican ticket from his new home in Israel, saying "I'll move back if you vote for me".
I'm friends on social media with Dan Gilman and think he'd make an excellent eventual successor to Peduto after his first two terms are complete. He's a junior-level councilman, but he's more vocal and seems to be more "involved" than my own junior-level councilwoman, Deb Gross. He's learning the ropes quickly. Gross was here in Polish Hill once that I can recall to help with a clean-up day, and she was also in front of Immaculate Heart of Mary Church, our polling precinct, asking my partner to vote for her a couple of years ago. I haven't heard a peep out of her since, and she's not very active on social media.
Out of all current city council members Gilman seems like he'd be one of the only ones with mayoral aspirations. Kail-Smith is chummy with me, too, but said she is happiest being a city councilwoman. Harris isn't going to seek re-election (thank God), so maybe the North Side can look forward to more progress with someone less obstructionist at the helm. She seems to be very opposed to any project in her district that will be urbane, cosmopolitan, and/or increase density, despite the fact that half her district is the very urban Lower North Side. I think Rudiak is great mayoral material, but I also don't know if she'd be up for the task, especially due to a recent tragic death in her family. She seems too "sweet" for a mayoral job that would come with a lot of vinegar being tossed in her direction. Burgess comes off almost as polarizing to me as Harris. Lavelle seems like he'd be mayoral material, but I don't know if he'd run. Corey O'Connor would be my second guess as to another councilman who might consider a future mayoral bid besides Gilman. I doubt Bruce Kraus would consider running. Given how quiet Gross has been I don't think she'd have any "oomph" behind a mayoral bid.
I pretty much agree with your summary, however I would be all in for Rudiak. She is a great council member who represents her district and works hard for it. She is smart, friendly, and really has her districts best interests in mind. Would be nice to see a progressive woman as mayor of Pittsburgh soon. Sign me up for that campaign.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
