Share This Page

Pittsburgh Tuesday takes

| Monday, Aug. 12, 2013, 9:00 p.m.

Full disclosure: VisitPittsburgh, the local tourism-promotion agency, is refusing to release a full study that found four employees are paid significantly higher salaries than those at comparable agencies in other cities. All it will release is a two-page summary. Just retired Chairman and CEO Joe McGrath was paid more than $390,000 in 2011. Current boss Craig Davis makes $240,000 annually. But this is a public agency underwritten by taxpayer dollars. The full report must be made public.

A better idea?: The Pittsburgh-Allegheny County Sports & Exhibition Authority initially wanted to design and redevelop the old Civic Arena site in phases — as financing became available. Now, holding out hope for a federal grant, it's hoping to design and develop the 28-acre Lower Hill District site in one shebang. But is that really the better idea? Wouldn't it be more prudent to develop in phases, as originally planned, and better take advantage of changing market trends?

Time to bounce back: The Pittsburgh Pirates limp into St. Louis tonight for a critical three-game series with the Cardinals. The Battlin' Bucs were swept by the Colorado Rockies over the weekend. But the Dodgers did a number on the birds and the Pirates maintained their three-game lead over St. Louis in the National League Central. As slumps go, that's the kind you want if you must slump. Here's to a reversal of fortunes this week.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.