So how do you think Peduto doing as Pittsburgh's mayor? (Etna: appointed, 2014)

[gg]

I think he is doing pretty well for the city. Pittsburgh progresses slow, but that isn't always a bad thing. What do you think?

https://www.publicsource.org/during-...to-pittsburgh/

[xdv8]

I'm excited, this thread will give us all a great understanding of how the totally unbiased citizens of Aspinwall, Etna, McCandless, Cranberry, Murrysville, or wherever think of a mayor they can't even vote for. Good stuff ahead as usual ��

[Copanut]

I think he's doing a great job, just needs to work on his hair.

[bradjl2009]

I think he's doing fine. The city's finances are still doing well, murders have been trending down each year since 2014 (even last year, the city still had less murders than it 2017), and I think he has done what he can to get people around the country to think more about Pittsburgh. Plus unlike Ravenstahl, he acts like an adult.

[gg]

Originally Posted by xdv8

I'm excited, this thread will give us all a great understanding of how the totally unbiased citizens of Aspinwall, Etna, McCandless, Cranberry, Murrysville, or wherever think of a mayor they can't even vote for. Good stuff ahead as usual ��

Lol. Well many use the city and work there. I think he is doing pretty well. I think he is making good changes for the most part.

You might be right about this thread though. Maybe it will just go down the tubes. We lost a lot of good posters on here due to so much background noise, but that is true with most all the Internet stuff.

[lprmesia]

What's the over/under on how many pages until Yac shows up?

I've been mostly a proponent. I support(ed) much of the publicity he garnered for the city in terms of the "Pittsburgh not Paris" as well as how he approached the Amazon bid. Both unpopular, but I viewed both as favorable.

I was impressed with how he handled some of the backlash of the bike lane expansion by actually listening to both sides of the argument and making the right choice more often than not. I'll use 18th Street as an example when they wanted to eliminate street parking on residential sections of 18th Street to put in bike lanes. There were some pretty nasty pro-bike advocates, and thankfully he listened to the residents and the proposal was scrapped.

This gave me a bit of a view or perception of him as someone with a grand vision, but still pragmatic enough to pick and chose the right battles.

However, that same pragmatism I saw with some of the bike lane stuff has been absent with how he's handled the proposed gun legislation. It comes across as a very crude attempt to push through a first pass draft without soliciting feedback which has plenty of hurdles and challenges (which screams of political posturing). Only recently have they agreed to have "expert" feedback come in to look at it after a lot of push back. Some weird quirks are:

1. If you own a pistol for personal safety in your home but don't have any ammo, it's illegal to have ammunition sent to your home. Once you run out of ammo, you essentially can't get ammo.
2. The law permits gun ranges, but bans gun owners to transport their pistol, airsoft gun, etc to said range.
3. If you own a pistol or shotgun and move out of the city, by taking the gun with you, you would be breaking the law unless your property was adjacent to land outside of the city and could transport it directly via those means.
4. If you have a state issued CCW and are driving through the city with your gun (regardless of if it's locked up or in your glove box, etc), you would be breaking the law.

Then of course there's the typical arguments some people make that the laws only impact law abiding citizens, that it's an infringement on the 2nd amendment, that it invites criminal activity into Pittsburgh, blah blah etc etc. I've seen other things as well, and some of it gets pretty granular and well beyond my understanding as a (current) non-gun owner.

Also as a taxpayer both living and working in the city, it's frustrating to watch him try to push through a law that contradicts state law which could add to legal disputes and fees costing the city money, which I feel could be better spent elsewhere. The whole DA Zappala thing too reeks of this being a giant PR stunt on the taxpayer dime.

So at this point, I'm not sure if I saw something in him previously that wasn't there, or if he's evolving trying to get his name out there on the bigger stage at all costs including grandstanding on a public tragedy to do it. Plus, this one is likely to cost more money than a few trashcans with someone's name on it.

Regardless, my perception of him as a leader is fading.

[Goinback2011]

He isn't interested in being Mayor of Pittsburgh anymore. He wants a new job.

[tyovan4]

Originally Posted by Goinback2011

He isn't interested in being Mayor of Pittsburgh anymore. He wants a new job.

Where could he go? Is Mike Doyle going somewhere?
This clown would get destroyed in any state-wide race.

[svband76]

I see Peduto as too often tackling issues that are beyond the scope of why people elected him. I've never seen a mayor so concerned about the President of the United States before. His snubbing of the president after the temple shooting was ridiculous. And I'm not a trump fan at all. I want my mayor to address the important everyday issues that most affect us, like potholes, constantly flooding roads, garbage. I do like the bike lanes but he needs to be more than that.

[Goinback2011]

Originally Posted by tyovan4

Where could he go? Is Mike Doyle going somewhere?
This clown would get destroyed in any state-wide race.

People elected Wolf. Peduto is doing the bidding of national party interests to position himself for other jobs, elected or appointed. He is fighting for Peduto, not Pittsburgh.