Pittsburgh council members request documents, audit related to park tax | TribLIVE.com
Allegheny

Pittsburgh council members request documents, audit related to park tax

Bob Bauder
1964087_web1_ptr-observatory-file
Tribune-Review
The Allegheny Observatory in Pittsburgh’s Riverview Park.

Several Pittsburgh City Council members want to examine all agreements between the city and Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy before considering how to deal with an estimated $10 million in annual revenue from a parks tax approved by voters earlier this month.

Council on Tuesday introduced two resolutions that would require the Mayor’s Office to turn over all contracts, agreements and leases with the conservancy and have Controller Michael Lamb’s office audit them. Members are expected to discuss the resolutions next week before a preliminary vote.

Council members Deb Gross, Theresa Kail-Smith, Darlene Harris and Anthony Coghill sponsored the resolutions. All had voiced opposition to the Nov. 5 ballot referendum, which asked voters to approve a 0.5 mill property tax increase on city residents starting in 2020. The measure won with 51.8% of the vote.

The anticipated revenue will go into a trust fund controlled by the city and be used exclusively for park improvements citywide. Mayor Bill Peduto, who supported the tax, has said the parks face a $400 million funding gap in deferred maintenance and improvements and an annual $13 million shortfall in maintenance funds each year. He said the city can’t handle that financial burden alone.

“The administration is happy to give council whatever documents we have,” Peduto spokesman Tim McNulty said.

Gross and Kail-Smith said they want to see all agreements the city has with the conservancy before considering future legislation involving the tax revenue.

“We want make sure council has final say on how any public tax dollars are allocated,” Kail-Smith said.

Coghill said the resolutions are not an attempt to overturn the tax.

“I reluctantly accept the count of the vote,” he said. “We’re were not going to be challenging the vote. We’re not going to try to recall the tax. We thought the prudent steps, first of all, would be to look at the cooperation agreements that the city has with the parks conservancy to make everything transparent and on the table because we’re going to be entering into a partnership with the conservancy.”

Gross said members also want to know if the conservancy receives any compensation from park users for events such as weddings held in park facilities.

Messages left with the conservancy were not returned.

“I think that we all understand that this millage will be collected and there will be revenue from it, but we don’t all have an understanding about when and how it gets expended,” Gross said. “These cooperation agreements are really about who’s doing what and who’s paying whom. If we all start with the same set of information, I think it will make the conversation a lot easier and the public can really understand the scope of work.”

Bob Bauder is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Bob at 412-564-3080, [email protected] or via Twitter .

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.