Self-driving education grant runs into opposition at Pittsburgh City Council |

Self-driving education grant runs into opposition at Pittsburgh City Council

Bob Bauder
Bob Bauder | Tribune-Review
Ziggy Edwards of an area known as The Run in Pittsburgh’s Greenfield neighborhood, speaks out against the use of autonomous vehicles in Pittsburgh during a City Council meeting on May 29, 2019. Ziggy Edwards of The Run in Pittsburgh’s Greenfield neighborhood, speaks out against the use of autonomous vehicles in Pittsburgh during a City Council meeting on Wednesday.

Pittsburgh City Council will likely authorize acceptance of a $410,000 grant aimed at educating residents on the use of autonomous vehicles in the city, but members plan to provide amendments for how that should be done.

Council in a preliminary vote Wednesday agreed to accept the money disbursed over three years from the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation.

Karina Ricks, who heads the Department of Mobility and Infrastructure, said up to 75 percent of the funding would be used to hire a staffer who would oversee public information programming. The rest would be used to support public meetings, including such things as videos and printed material, and to develop a work plan for how the city should address future autonomous vehicle use in Pittsburgh.

The funding has generated controversy among local activists and some city residents who have voiced concerns that it would be used as a public relations program for autonomous vehicle companies. During a council meeting Wednesday, they urged members to include the public and consider the impact of autonomous vehicles on public safety, public transportation and city jobs.

Ricks said she plans to do just that.

“I think that the quantity of public testimony tells you how important this kind of engagement is,” Ricks said. “What this grant will do is give us the staff capacity so that we can have a dedicated person who can have these conversations and continue them over the course of the three-year period. We would be unable to do that without that grant.”

Councilwoman Darlene Harris voted no, saying she was concerned about the safety of autonomous vehicle testing in the city. Council members Corey O’Connor and Deb Gross abstained. Councilwoman Erika Strassburger is on maternity leave. O’Connor said he would offer amendments before next week’s vote.

“I want to write some amendments, talk to council members and also meet with residents of the community,” he said. “I think we want to set the standard for what the outreach looks like.”

Council also voted to schedule a future public hearing and a public information gathering session, known as a post agenda, on autonomous vehicles.

“This grant money is an opportunity to have a say in the process,” Councilwoman Theresa Kail-Smith said. “I think we need to start having some serious conversations.”

Residents and advocacy groups including Pittsburghers for Public Transit, the Sierra Club and Bike Pittsburgh, said the city has not engaged the public in a meaningful way about autonomous vehicles.

“We are here today to ask you, our city council members, to establish guidelines to ensure that these resources will be used to discuss all of the known or anticipated impacts that (autonomous vehicles) will have, (from) good middle-class jobs and the economy to the environment, pedestrian safety, data privacy and to public transit and mobility, particularly for the under served,” said Laura Wiens, director of Pittsburghers for Public Transit.

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 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.