Colin McNickle: Auction those Pittsburgh property holdings |
Featured Commentary

Colin McNickle: Auction those Pittsburgh property holdings

Colin McNickle

The City of Pittsburgh should expedite the sale of city-owned property by injecting the marketplace into the process, says a new white paper by the Allegheny Institute for Public Policy.

“Property could move more rapidly from the city to the general public though an auction,” says Eric Montarti, research director.

“The city could focus on property that has been held for the longest number of years, the most attractive parcels or some other option,” he says.

A September performance audit by the city Controller’s Office confirmed what many people have experienced firsthand: Buying such properties is a drawn out, multi-step and time-consuming process — one that lacks transparency, which could foster favoritism and fraud.

The audit was prompted by the conflicted 2017 sale of a property to the city’s real estate manager who, after an investigation, was forced to pay a fine of at least $5,000. In response to the audit, the city is drafting a new policy regarding city employees purchasing city properties.

Indeed, sales numbers show a pattern of sales paucity. As but one example (from the three processes in which properties can be sold), of the 926 properties found to be eligible for sale in 2017 (out of 1,977 that sought a Treasurer’s sale), only 59 (about 6% of eligible properties) were sold.

Among the audit’s 44 recommendations are three that involve a strategy to sell property through quarterly public auctions, to aggressively advertise those auctions and ensure that the staff is qualified to see them through.

The auction call is nothing new to the Allegheny Institute; it has urged just that — thrice — since 2003.

“Given the assessment of the property sales progress by the audit, it is clear there has to be an opportunity to try something different,” Montarti says.

In addition to a Treasurer’s sale, city-owned properties can be sold through the city’s e-properties website or a side-yard purchase of a city-owned lot that abuts a private property.

The city’s Urban Redevelopment Authority has veto power over any sale.

It has done so in nearly half of proposed purchases and, in nearly one-quarter of those tentative sales, has not provided any rationale for the rejection.

According to audit findings, that has left nearly 3,000 parcels “on hold.” More than a third of those have been on hold for more than eight years, with 78 held for more than 50 years.

“There is mention of new strategies to sell property, so that provides a glimmer of hope,” Montarti says of the City Finance Department Division of Sales’ official response to the audit.

“There’s nothing to lose at this point except a lot of property that is not generating tax revenue but could be through private ownership.”

Colin McNickle is communications and marketing director at the Allegheny Institute for Public Policy and can be reached via email.

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.