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 would hazard a guess that SCRs problem may be with the lack of public oversight over the use of the tax - its going to a private entity. I would guess that he'd feel differently if the taxes were going to directly support the Parks Department.
City council will be drafting the rules of how it can be spent, which will include city council itself having to vote on each expenditure, so it’s not like its going to a slush fund controls by the Parks Conservancy.
City council will be drafting the rules of how it can be spent, which will include city council itself having to vote on each expenditure, so it’s not like its going to a slush fund controls by the Parks Conservancy.
It’s not materially different than the Carnegie Library using tax money. No one seems to have a problem with that private entity. For the record, I voted for the tax, but was initially torn. It’s a very complicated issue, and there are no right or wrong answers.
-Voted against the park tax. Why, pray tell? My city councilor, Deb Gross, made a brilliant post on Facebook urging us to vote no because we vote to elect city councilors for THEM to decide to raise taxes on us (or not) so that we could hold THEM accountable (or not) on Election Day.
A respectable position. I likely wouldve voted against the proposed tax if it were on my ballot - because I believe that savings/efficiencies should have been found elsewhere. However, I respect your position.
This is one of the things that is a downside to me regarding Pittsburgh. The elites have too much power through the various non-profits and foundations. I believe that the foundations, with their money, buy too much power and access. And I am concerned with the power of the non-profits (and in this instance, I'm not referring to 'non-profits' like UPMC and Highmark - I'm referring to organizations like the Allegheny Conference and the Parks Conservancy). Last year, there was a County-wide issue that was very similar to the Parks issue. Remember the referendum, spearheaded by 'Allies for Children', regarding the creation of an 'Allegheny County Childrens' Fund'. I voted against it.. Ive met Patrick Dowd, I like him, I respect him, and I trust him. But I felt that the proposed fund smelled too much like a slush fun, with very ill-defined goals to spend the money with little oversight. For that reason, I voted against that referendum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelCityRising
-Dislike Mayor Peduto’s affinity for media grandstanding, virtue-signaling, and self-aggrandizement. He had ZERO business involving our city in the Antwon Rose case. To date East Pittsburgh has yet to pay Pittsburgh the seven figures we had to spent on police overtime for the protests we incurred for THEIR problem that they were more than happy to kick over to us once Mayor Peduto went hog wild on Twitter and took ownership of the issue. Mayor Peduto also has no business telling companies to not site themselves in Beaver County (and by that same token the fine people of Beaver County have no business telling we Pittsburghers to remove our bike lanes).
My biggest problem with him is that he just wants to score easy points by showing that he's the Great Progressive Messiah. He constantly claims that he has no aspirations for higher political office, yet he's constantly interjecting himself into state, Federal, and global politics. He's talking out of both sides of his mouth.
He also doesn't use his bully pulpit to help the common man. He runs his mouth about anything and everything - EXCEPT for issues that truly matter locally like the UPMC/Highmark divorce. He's not doing anything to get PILOT from the 'non-profits' (UPMC, Highmark, the universities, etc), he's advocating tax increases on the working class, and he's in bed with developers and is Hell-bent on further gentrifying the City.
He's a Social Justice Warrior about identity politics and about anything that's trendy. Otherwise, he's fellating Michael Bloomberg and Jeff Bezos while he bends the working class over the barrel.
He's a clown and a hypocrite.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelCityRising
-Voted AGAINST Marsy’s Law—despite being loved by my fellow progressive East Enders—because it is abhorrent that one of its statutes would permit a victim to withhold potentially exculpatory evidence from the defendant/defense counsel. If I’ve been wrongfully accused of a crime, and if the one piece of evidence that can exonerate me is being held by the victim, then under Marsy’s Law I could end up wrongfully convicted, as the victim could then be allowed to choose to withhold that evidence. How Marsy’s Law passed in PA in a landslide is beyond my realm of comprehension.
I voted against it because I read of problems with it in Montana. If a red state like Montana has problems with it, AND the ACLU has problems with it - then it seemed to me to be problematic enough that it wasn't worth trying here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelCityRising
-SUPPORT our law enforcement. If 10,000 out of 900,000 law enforcement officers in our country are pieces of crap, then why should the other 890,000 suffer?
I'm not a fan of the local anti-police protesters. Particularly as I believe many of them are racists. (Here's looking at Nicky Jo Dawson).
But I'm also not a fan of the PBP or the FOP. They're as big of clowns as Peduto is.
The police do a HORRIBLE job of policing themselves.
There are only a few bad apples in the barrel. But the good apples dont band together and get rid of the bad apples - they allow them to stay and contaminate the entire barrel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelCityRising
-RESPECT President Trump. No, I did not vote for him. No, I will not vote for him in 2020. No, I do not agree with 90% of the things that come out of his mouth. With that being said he was elected to be the president of our country, and I respect the office he holds. He’s been incredibly effective at delivering MOST things he promised his supporters. Most likely he’ll be re-elected in 2020 and die three years into his second term (obesity + mid-70’s + chronic anger and stress = heart attack). Then we’ll briefly have a President Pence followed by a Democratic successor. In any event he’s a man—not the Anti-Christ.
To me, Peduto's attitude towards Trump is a further example of him being a clown.
Peduto refused to meet with Trump when Trump was here after Tree of Life.
Peduto refused to meet with Trump wen Trump was here for the shale conference.
Its just idiotic. Why go there and meet with junior people, when you couldve met with the senior most person when they were visiting your own turf??
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelCityRising
-Believe major non-profits (UPMC, Pitt, CMU, and Highmark) should each be paying ~$1,000,000 - ~$5,000,000 per year (based upon size) to the city in lieu of taxes. Those funds should go to public safety enhancements. The city overall is safe. I mean our current 31 homicides in mid-November is the lowest it’s been in many years. With that being said Downtown especially now has a growing image of being “unsafe” due to the throngs of mentally ill persons, addicts, homeless, and juvenile delinquent street urchins all intersecting. Those four major non-profits each kicking in just $1,000,000/year would mean many new police officers could be hired.
It’s not materially different than the Carnegie Library using tax money.
I suppose that I see them a little differently in terms of how the resources may be equitably distributed.
For library materials, even if the bulk of new purchases are added to the 'nicer' libraries in 'nicer' neighborhoods - everyone can still use them by simply making a request for the materials and then theyre delivered (free of charge) to the library branch that the requester deems to be most convenient.
Parks can't easily share resources like that. If an investment is made in one park, users MUST go to that park to use those amenities. Given that the City already ignores entire sections of itself (the entire West End, anything south of Carson St or north of East Ohio Street) - I can understand the apprehension of the residents of the 'left-behind/forgotten/ignored' sections of the City that their taxes will go up, they wont see anything to show for it in their neighborhood, and they'll be subsidizing nicer parks for the Übermenschen of the East End Centre of the Universe.
I suppose that I see them a little differently in terms of how the resources may be equitably distributed.
For library materials, even if the bulk of new purchases are added to the 'nicer' libraries in 'nicer' neighborhoods - everyone can still use them by simply making a request for the materials and then theyre delivered (free of charge) to the library branch that the requester deems to be most convenient.
Parks can't easily share resources like that. If an investment is made in one park, users MUST go to that park to use those amenities. Given that the City already ignores entire sections of itself (the entire West End, anything south of Carson St or north of East Ohio Street) - I can understand the apprehension of the residents of the 'left-behind/forgotten/ignored' sections of the City that their taxes will go up, they wont see anything to show for it in their neighborhood, and they'll be subsidizing nicer parks for the Übermenschen of the East End Centre of the Universe.
The nicer East End parks are funded by the RAD. Lots of affluent EastEnders are upset that their tax dollars are going to support parks in other neighborhoods. I would say they’re probably five or six different demographics that are unhappy with this tax for five or six different reasons. There are a lot of legitimate concerns, but they just as many, if not more people being greedy and selfish.
City Council will have ultimate oversight. We’ll just have to see how it goes.
I suppose that I see them a little differently in terms of how the resources may be equitably distributed.
For library materials, even if the bulk of new purchases are added to the 'nicer' libraries in 'nicer' neighborhoods - everyone can still use them by simply making a request for the materials and then theyre delivered (free of charge) to the library branch that the requester deems to be most convenient.
Parks can't easily share resources like that. If an investment is made in one park, users MUST go to that park to use those amenities. Given that the City already ignores entire sections of itself (the entire West End, anything south of Carson St or north of East Ohio Street) - I can understand the apprehension of the residents of the 'left-behind/forgotten/ignored' sections of the City that their taxes will go up, they wont see anything to show for it in their neighborhood, and they'll be subsidizing nicer parks for the Übermenschen of the East End Centre of the Universe.
It’s more than just the East End, RAD funds can only be applied to the five largest parks in the system, the regional parks, consisting of Frick, Schenley, Highland, Riverview, and Emerald View. That leaves 160 other neighborhood parks with very little funding and city workers to maintain. The plan is to address those parks with this new funding.
I have read that people believe we have bigger issues like streets and sidewalks. While I agree that streets need paved, and the city is paving more than ever these days, but sidewalks are not the cities responsibility. Those fall on homeowners, so crumbling sidewalks are your neighbors fault, not the cities.
The nicer East End parks are funded by the RAD. Lots of affluent EastEnders are upset that their tax dollars are going to support parks in other neighborhoods. I would say they’re probably five or six different demographics that are unhappy with this tax for five or six different reasons. There are a lot of legitimate concerns, but they just as many, if not more people being greedy and selfish.
City Council will have ultimate oversight. We’ll just have to see how it goes.
It is strange that people would be upset about their tax dollars going to help other parts of the city. I mean isn’t that how all taxes work? They fund things in the governed body, not just the street/neighbhorhood the tax payer lives in. That sounds like people just being horrible more than anything.
It is strange that people would be upset about their tax dollars going to help other parts of the city. I mean isn’t that how all taxes work? They fund things in the governed body, not just the street/neighbhorhood the tax payer lives in. That sounds like people just being horrible more than anything.
They likely feel they they pay too much in taxes to begin, and they wouldn’t be wrong. Not to mention being concerned with how the money ends up being spent, and they wouldn’t be wrong about that, either.
It’s more than just the East End, RAD funds can only be applied to the five largest parks in the system, the regional parks, consisting of Frick, Schenley, Highland, Riverview, and Emerald View. That leaves 160 other neighborhood parks with very little funding and city workers to maintain. The plan is to address those parks with this new funding.
I have read that people believe we have bigger issues like streets and sidewalks. While I agree that streets need paved, and the city is paving more than ever these days, but sidewalks are not the cities responsibility. Those fall on homeowners, so crumbling sidewalks are your neighbors fault, not the cities.
right - but that is MY point. do we NEED these parks? are they often used to warrant their upkeep? could the parks dept. use some streamlining that would free up funds?
with our continually declining population, it would be reasonable that some amenities are cut back.
right - but that is MY point. do we NEED these parks? are they often used to warrant their upkeep? could the parks dept. use some streamlining that would free up funds?
with our continually declining population, it would be reasonable that some amenities are cut back.
These usually come hand in hand with a growing population that can support it. I’ve never heard of city doing this type of tax and giving money to some agency outside of the city. It’s bizarre....
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.
