Yesterday Pittsburgh City Council gave preliminary approval to an ordinance amending the Pittsburgh City Code by removing language that says bicycles are confined to roads.

"The current city code confines bicycles to paved road use," cyclist Eryn Hughes said during the public comment period at the start of the meeting. "Despite the inherent confusion about policy the current and actual use of the wooded trails is primarily by mountain bikers who have lovingly stewarded them over 30 years following in the tire tracks of the volunteers before them."

The ordinance which was unanimously supported by council adds language to allow cyclists to ride in "wooded trail" areas that are often used by mountain bikers in city parks.

"This is really a technicality that we're solving," said Councilor Corey O'Connor, chair of the urban recreation committee and sponsor of the legislation. "The old ordinance said if you're on a wooden trail you had to push your bike. So now we're allowing bike riders to bike in our parks and trail systems.  It's a very minor technical amendment that we're making just to clarify the ordinance."

Some members made a point of emphasizing that the change to the city code will not allow cyclists to ride in pedestrian-designated areas in city parks.

"I just want to clarify that there are certain things you can do in the park in certain places and you're still not going to be able to ride in a picnic shelter area or places where people have permits and other places that are otherwise identified," said Councilor Theresa Kail-Smith.

Also at the meeting was Eric Boerer, the advocacy director of BikePGH, who said changing the city code would increase Pittsburgh's standing as a bike-friendly city.

Earlier this week members of the city's Wage Review Committee met with members of Pittsburgh City Council to discuss findings in a report they released in December. The report was the result of two days of testimony from 130 hospital and service workers along with healthcare experts and economists.

"Many hospital workers work so many extra hours weekly to try to make ends meet to support their families. After receiving their paychecks, many workers qualify for public assistance," said Marla Blunt, a food service worker and member of SEIU 32BJ who serves on the committee. "Service workers have to stand in line for hours at a time at food pantries and food banks to feed their families. They are forced with decisions of feeding their children or their lights or gas being turned off. What a choice to have to make."

Among the Wage Review Committee's recommendations is that council endorse the demand of hospital workers to be paid at least $15 per hour. It also recommends that council "actively support workers' right to form a union without interference or intimidation from hospital management," and "incentivize hospital employers to improve pay and working conditions for hospital service workers, through the exercise of its authority in the areas of budgeting, contracting, zoning and building codes, public health and safety."

"I look forward to digesting these recommendations. What I heard today though was really confirmation of already existing suspicion," said Council President Bruce Kraus. "My question is this, where do we go from here. There has to be a concrete plan of action we can take."

Much of the discussion at Tuesday's post agenda meeting focused on hospital service workers, namely those at UPMC facilities who have been working to form a union in an effort to increase their wages and benefits. But the conversation about poor wages and benefits for UPMC service workers has been going on for several years and some at the meeting asked what's next.

"We had a lawsuit against UPMC as the city, and I don't know what's happened. I understand from the papers that the mayor has dropped that lawsuit, and I think that was really a strength that we had," said Councilor Darlene Harris. "So what could we do? We could follow through with the lawsuit we started with." 

The lawsuit launched by former mayor Luke Ravenstahl challenged UPMC's nonprofit status. In his remarks before council, another Wage Review Committee member Nicholas Cafardi, a Duquesne University Law professor, also questioned UPMC's tax-exempt status.

"There are some scholars of nonprofit law, myself among them, that would say that any charity that bonuses its executives out of excess revenues has conferred a private benefit," Cafardi said of the high wages earned by top UPMC executives. "One major healthcare organization in Pittsburgh has a long history of bonusing its top executives. "

The question of UPMC's nonprofit status has been raised frequently over the years. And taking away UPMC's tax-exempt status has been threatened as a form of leverage to improve working conditions for their employees to no avail. 

"Folks working a full work week at a public charity should not be on food stamps or medical assistance, at least not while the top executives use their power over the organization to walk out the door every year with millions," said Cafardi. "Now of course those executives work hard and deserve a market rate wage but not at the cost of depriving those at the bottom of the pyramid of a living wage. That is a private profit, and I believe that it it disqualifies such an organization from tax exemption in Pennsylvania."

Temperatures this December have been some of the highest in recorded history. And with record-breaking highs last week, it was pretty clear there wouldn't be snow for Christmas.

Many have made light of the situation, filling the Internet with memes about Pittsburgh's unending rain. But it's not all comedic. Some cities have been especially hard hit by extreme weather, with rampant flooding leading to deaths throughout the country and abroad.

It's time, say many, for governments to address the causes behind these extreme weather conditions, most notably, climate change.

On Dec. 29, a group of local environmentalists took their concerns to Pittsburgh City Council to call on local government to divest from fossil fuels.

"The earth, as we know it, is changing right now," said Kelly Kochanski. "We're seeing more extreme events around the world. We're seeing droughts in California, rain in Alaska and the Northwest, and warm Decembers in Pittsburgh."

Yesterday's speakers are part of the Divest Pittsburgh movement, a campaign of the Thomas Merton Center, a local organization that advocates for peace and social justice. The group has worked with city council and Mayor Bill Peduto's office to craft legislation supporting fossil-fuel divestment in line with the Paris Accord, a legally binding global climate agreement that was adopted by 185 countries earlier this month. 

"We ask the city council to take action against this industry by divesting  from coal, oil and natural gas," said Raphael Cardamone, an intern at the Thomas Merton Center. "We have gathered over 400 signatures to petition this council to take action to pull its money out of this industry."

The ordinance would divest the city's public funds from fossil fuels within five years. These funds would be for "socially responsible" investments like local alternative energy production, small and medium businesses, and infrastructure and government improvement projects.

"The duty of the city council first and foremost is the well-being of the citizens that elected them," said Cardamone. "We are the sixth most polluted city in the United States and have one of the highest black-carbon ratings in the country. The lack of action against this danger to our citizens is alarming. This legislation is an opportunity for this council to take a moral and just stance against the methods and industry that threaten the lives of the citizens they were sworn to protect."

Following yesterday's meeting, Council President Bruce Kraus pledged to make working with Divest Pittsburgh one of his priorities in the new year. 

Yesterday, Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge Joseph James struck down the city's paid-sick-leave ordinance. The law, which was passed almost unanimously in August, would have granted city employees one hour of sick time for every 35 hours worked.

"Our members fought to get this law passed," says Janice Brown, regional vice president of Action United, one of the organizations who advocated for paid sick leave. "We were glad that city council and the mayor passed it."

However, almost immediately after the law was passed, the Pennsylvania Restaurant & Lodging Association, along with five local businesses, filed a lawsuit against it. The lawsuit alleged that the law exceeded the city's power.

"Obviously, the business owners, they wanted a little more in the bill and we understand that," says Pittsburgh City Councilor Corey O'Connor who sponsored the legislation. "I met with a lot of them that had objections. It's a give-and-take process. At the end of the day, we didn't meet their full criteria. If we went back to the drawing board, would it have changed the outcome today? Probably not."

O'Connor, and even the activists who championed for the ordinance, say they weren't surprised by the court challenge, but hoped the judge would rule in their favor. Similar court battles have been fought in cities like Seattle and Milwaukee. 

"I think it's a bad decision. But honestly we weren't surprised by it," says Brown. "We hope the city appeals this decision because we think it's wrong."

"It's the right thing to do," says Bill Bartlett, director of Action United. "I think it's terrible that the restaurants are going to waste all of this time and money in court. Ultimately, we hope the city challenges this." 

For now, O'Connor says Pittsburgh City Council and Mayor Bill Peduto will consult the city's law department to see what the options are.

"If this is a fight we're not going to win, we don't want to waste taxpayer money. We certainly believe in this cause, but at this point I don't know," says O'Connor. "On a positive note, the whole purpose of this bill was to fight for working families, and I think that was a clear message and one that we're going to continue to fight for as well."

According to Judge James' opinion, the paid-sick-leave ordinance violated Pennsylvania’s Home Rule Charter and Optional Plans Law by placing “affirmative duties on businesses, occupations and employers." To support his opinion, James referenced a 2009 Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision where another employment ordinance was defeated

"Obviously, we're disappointed. We thought the legislation we passed was a good piece of legislation," says  O'Connor. "Ultimately, at the end of the day, the outcome is a little positive, I think, because we now have a conversation about paid sick leave and before we didn't."

For the past five years, the Pittsburgh food truck industry has been steadily booming. What started as an entrepreneur or two looking to break into the food industry without the expensive overhead of a brick and mortar restaurant, has morphed into a new food scene where brick and mortar restaurants are looking to get into the action with trucks of their own.

At one of the many food-truck roundups throughout the month across the city, you'll  see food truck staples like the PGH Taco Truck, Mac and Gold, and Burgh Bites. But you'll also see trucks from restaurants like Nakama and Franktuary.

This dichotomy is present in the debate over new food truck legislation as well, with some brick and mortar owners supporting the lessening of restrictions on food trucks and others pushing back. 

At a Dec. 8 public hearing, individuals on both sides of the debate testified before Pittsburgh City Council.

Stephanie Morales of Las Chicas, a truck serving Hispanic cuisine, challenged assertions that food trucks threaten business at brick and mortar restaurants and said that increasing opportunities for food trucks to operate will only add to Pittsburgh's reputation as a burgeoning food town.

"Pittsburgh wants to be competitive, showcasing its city, its achievements, its activities with the world. Yet by the same token, they have a choke-hold on a trend that's about to break loose here," said Morales. "What are we afraid of: competition, growth?" 

Beyond issues with the competition food trucks create for restaurants, some critics expressed concern about the impact an increase in food trucks would have on the city, especially areas that are already high-traffic districts.

"We understand the need for such legislation. We understand why the city is pushing this. The food truck movement is definitely a strong economic movement, a strong entrepreneur effort," said Georgia Petropoulos, executive director of the Oakland Business Improvement District. "There have been some things we would like council to think about in terms of impact, and in particular we're talking about the Oakland business district area, which is the second most heavily congested area in the city."

Among the speakers calling for changes to the legislation was Jeremy Waldrup, president and CEO of the Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership.

"While I agree that the city code should be amended to allow food trucks to reasonably operate, specifically allowing trucks to operate for up to four hours, the proposed legislation falls short on a number of fronts," Waldrup said.

Waldrup called on City Council to create a special district to address the unique challenges of operating food trucks Downtown. He said the proposed legislation does not address issues like traffic, congestion and pollution.

"Simply allowing food trucks to operate in one of our 500 metered spaces throughout downtown without any understanding of streets and sidewalk congestion, and how streets function, is a recipe for chaos and will create opportunities for impassible streets, [and] frustrated pedestrians, businesses and food truck operators," said Waldrup.

Tim Tobitsch, who owns Franktuary, which has multiple brick-and-mortar locations as well as a food truck, spoke at the hearing in support of the food truck legislation.

"I might not love it if a food truck was in front of my restaurant, but it might be a great publicity opportunity, and I don't know what right I have to stop someone from parking on a public street," said Tobitsch. "I just don't think the arguments against food trucks hold up. I think an unwillingness to adapt to modern food trucks is actually a disservice to Pittsburgh's residents who those of us in the service industry should be focused on pleasing. Consumers should have options. Innovation should be allowed to happen. And food trucks help achieve that goal."

Earlier today, the city's  Wage Review Committee released a report  stating that "wages paid to hospital workers are insufficient." The committee recommends that Pittsburgh City Council endorse the demand of hospital workers to be paid at least $15 per hour.

The committee was established in October by Pittsburgh City Councilor Ricky Burgess as part of his "City for All" agenda addressing inequality in Pittsburgh.

At today's council meeting, a dozen hospital workers testified in support of the committee's findings and reiterated the struggles they face as a result of being paid less than $15 an hour.


"After 9 years, I make $12.75 working at UPMC, a multi-billion institution. It's difficult to afford gas for the car, let alone buy a new car. Forget about it," said Louis Berry. "It's not just me and my co-workers. Today, 46 percent of workers in the service sector make less than $15 per hour. Income inequality in our country is as stark as it's ever been before."  

Today's effort is part of a years-long struggle to improve working conditions for employees throughout the region. Service workers at hospitals, fast food restaurants and the Rivers Casino in particular have complained of low wages and inadequate benefits. Previous attempts to improve workers' rights have included fights to unionize workers at UPMC hospitals and the Rivers Casino, which have failed thus far; and a campaign for paid sick days, which resulted in a city-wide mandate approved by City Council earlier this fall.

Several members of City Council have long been openly supportive of the local efforts to unionize and increase wages. In April of this year, council approved a "will of council" supporting efforts by fast food workers. 

The Wage Review Committee is recommending that council "actively support workers' right to form a union without interference or intimidation from hospital management," and "incentivize hospital employers to improve pay and working conditions for hospital service workers, through the exercise of it's authority in the areas of budgeting, contracting, zoning and building codes, public health and safety."

"It's clear that left to their own devices, hospital employers don't pay workers a living wage," said Zach Zobrist, executive vice president of SEIU Healthcare Pennsylvania. "To lift service workers out of poverty, we have to take action to correct that imbalance of power between those who set wages and those who do the work."

Today's testimony zeroed in on UPMC, which has been the target of complaints from Pittsburgh's workers' rights movement. In March 2014, UPMC protesters shut down Downtown streets during two days of protests before Mayor Bill Peduto stepped in to say he would negotiate with UPMC leadership on their behalf. 

But to date, the mayor's office hasn't released any results from those negotiations.

"We gave UPMC a break last year as they were supposed to meet with the mayor. It's time for us to get back in the street," said William Anderson, a local activist who also testified today. "It's time for us to hold UPMC accountable."

This week Pittsburgh City Council considered a measure sponsored by District 9 Councilor Ricky Burgess that would provide resources for the city's most disadvantaged neighborhoods to undergo comprehensive community planning.

"A lot of our communities, especially our poor communities want to see development," said Burgess. "But they don't have the capacity to really form collaboratives or they don't have the money to do comprehensive planning." 

Burgess said his proposal would replicate success that has been seen in Larimer where community planning has led to several residential and commercial developments in recent years.

"The goal is that each of the communities over years would get the attention of the city, the resources of the city," says Burgess. "If left up to itself, we'll never get to some of these neighborhoods, we just won't. What this does is systematically every year pick three or four of them. So over the course of four or five years we will reach all of these communities and give them access to what we know works which is comprehensive community planning."

Neighborhoods would be ranked based on 15 indicators that have been developed by Pittsburgh's city planning department. The data points will include criteria such as the percentage of vacant lots in a neighborhood. The six neighborhoods who score the lowest will be targeted for additional resources.

District 2 Councilor Theresa Kail-Smith said she would be supportive of providing additional resources for struggling neighborhoods, but said she hopes residents will be in charge of driving changes in their neighborhood.

"Not all neighborhoods that might meet this criteria might agree with what we think should happen and some of them might not even want to see development," said Councilor Theresa Kail-Smith. "I want to help the neighborhoods that want development, but I want the neighborhoods to tell us."

Some city councilors at the meeting on Dec. 2 wondered whether there would be money allocated to back up the measure in order to ensure neighborhoods are receiving the resources they need for planning. 

"What I don't fully understand is once you're one of these six, is there a guarantee of any kind of money," said District 8 Councilor Daniel Gilman. "I understand the goal, but I don't understand the meat of what you actually get for being one of the six."

Burgess said council would work with Mayor Bill Peduto to find funding streams. Currently, the plan is for each neighborhood to get $100,000 over three years to fund the planning process.

"If you don't do the ground work, just throwing money at a community doesn't actually bring about change," said Gilman. "So if there are dollars involved I'd like to see it spelled out in the legislation that it goes to that planning process."

The legislation was held for one week.

Today Pittsburgh City Council held a  public hearing and post agenda meeting on a piece of legislation that would add  "source of income" as a protected class against housing discrimination.

"I think everyone should have housing choices. It always interests me that we say we want things to be fair for everyone, but we don’t want to do our fair share to make it inclusive," said Councilor Ricky Burgess, who sponsored the legislation. "Every time we try to change something to make it more livable, there are often cries from a minority that we do not want to sacrifice to make the city most livable for everyone."

The legislation would impact those who receive housing assistance vouchers. Many of today's speakers said landlords deny tenants who use housing vouchers, commonly referred to as Section 8 vouchers, as a way to exclude minorities. 

"Businesses don’t want regulation, and people and poor people need protection from bad businesses practices," said Barney Oursler, executive director of Pittsburgh United. "The vast number of [postings that say 'No Section 8'] on Craigslist points out the problem."

But other speakers, including James Eichenlaub from the Apartment Association of Metropolitan Pittsburgh who opposes the legislation, said the housing choice voucher program has a lot of barriers for landlords that keep them from wanting to participate in the program. He said these barriers include lengthy wait times during the application process. 

While Richard Morris, director of housing for the Urban League agreed that the housing voucher system could be improved, he also said many of the hurdles associated with housing vouchers are necessary.

"Landlords claim the process is cumbersome, but I’ve found that if you go to the housing authority to raise your concerns they will listen," Morris said. "The rules that they say are so cumbersome are rules that you would want for anyone living in a home."

Another speaker, Paul O' Hanlon, a member of the City-County Task Force on Disabilities, cautioned the public not to think of this legislation in terms of housing choice vouchers alone. He said it would also benefit those with disabilities and others who receive housing assistance.

"I think it’s critically important that we have a protection for source of income," O'Hanlon said. "We have to remember that it’s not just Section 8 vouchers."

Tomorrow, Pittsburgh City Councilor Daniel Lavelle will propose an ordinance to decriminalize marijuana. The measure was spurred by the Bloomfield Garfield Corporation and the Pittsburgh branch of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws in an effort to reduce the negative effects of criminal charges for marijuana possession.

"I know it is a bill that is going to have a lot of controversy around it," says Aggie Brose of the Bloomfield Garfield Corporation  I do not want to see another generation of young people in the position that we're seeing these men in on our streets in. It's hard to get employed."

Brose said her organization has been working with NORML on the legislation for the past two years and were inspired by a similar law passed in Philadelphia. Since then, they've met with Lavelle who currently serves as council's public safety chair, District Attorney Stephen Zappala and Pittsburgh Police Chief Cameron McLay. 

"The reason it worked in Philadelphia is the district attorney [and] the chief of police all supported it, or else it will fail," says Brose. "Even though this might seem strange, we feel we're doing this for all the right reasons."

The new ordinance would cite and fine individuals up to $100 for possession of under 30 grams of marijuana or 8 grams of hashish. Brose says the current consequences for marijuana possession create unreasonable employment barriers that have had a negative impact on many neighborhoods.

"All these people have records now," says Brose. "They really don't have the knowledge or the money to know that after five years they could get it expunged."

See the full release after the jump:

Bar Marco, Dozen, Piccolo Forno, Espresso a Mano, Avenue B, Cure, Legume, Meat and Potatoes, Salt of the Earth and Franktuary. The owners of these brick-and-mortar cafes and restaurants are among 3,000 Pittsburghers supporting a new Pittsburgh City Council measure that could increase the availability of food trucks and other street vendors throughout the city. 

"These are brick-and-mortar restaurants who pay property taxes, and they're all signing this petition saying food trucks add to the culinary culture of the city. When you read a lot of the press about what makes Pittsburgh great, it's the food scene," Councilor Daniel Gilman said at a city council meeting this week.  "And this is just a piece of that. It supports small business, it supports entrepreneurs, it supports our business districts all at the same time, and in my opinion, without causing any harm."

The ordinance, proposed by Gilman this week, would amend the city code regarding peddlers and vendors. Among the changes are a reduction of the mandated distance between brick-and-mortar businesses and street vendors from 500 feet to 100 feet.

Similar attempts to alleviate restrictions on street vendors have gone before city council in the past and failed as a result of opposition from brick and mortar restaurants.

But at the Nov. 10 meeting, several business owners, both brick and mortar and street vendors, spoke in favor of the legislation. Among them was Katie Heldstab, co-owner of Leona's Ice Cream Sandwiches, who pointed to the Strip District as an example of brick-and-mortar businesses and street vendors working in harmony.

"If you walk down there on a Saturday, there are pop-up locations up and down that street that are literally blocking the way to brick-and-mortar restaurants, and everyone's packed," Heldstab said.   "So [in terms of] restaurant and food density, that's an obvious case study that more is more. And if you look at where we are today in Pittsburgh, that's a huge success story."

The ordinance was held for a public hearing that will be held Dec. 8.