ShareThis Page
Part-time City Council resolution offered |

Part-time City Council resolution offered

Mike Wereschagin
| Tuesday, May 18, 2004 12:00 p.m

Pittsburgh City Council members are putting in too many hours, Allegheny County Council Republicans say.

Six of the seven county Republicans have co-sponsored a resolution asking the state-appointed oversight board to recommend to the state Legislature that the office of City Council be part time and come with a much smaller paycheck.

Republicans plan to introduce the resolution — which doesn’t recommend changing City Council’s duties and responsibilities — at tonight’s County Council meeting.

The plan would make the city’s legislative branch mirror the county’s system. County Council members make $9,000 a year, meet once every two weeks and share a staff. In City Council, members meet twice a week, make $53,687 a year and each has more than $99,000 for personal staff. Both bodies usually have several committee meetings each week.

The resolution also recommends adding two at-large council seats — one for each party, like the county has — to be elected citywide.

County Councilman Vince Gastgeb, the Republican leader from Bethel Park, said City Council members represent fewer people than their county counterparts, and so should be able to do their jobs with the same resources the county has. Each City Council district has about 35,000 people, compared to 100,000 living in each County Council district.

They don’t do the same job, though, said City Councilman William Peduto. There’s a fundamental difference between city and county governments in Pennsylvania; county government is basically a local extension of state government, responsible for things like human services and courts, he said.

“Everything else is left to local government,” Peduto said. “Whether it’s a dog barking or an economic development plan, it comes down to local government.”

A part-time City Council also wouldn’t be able to serve as an effective check on the mayor’s power, said City Councilman Alan Hertzberg.

“You get what you pay for,” Hertzberg said. “If someone is being paid at (County Council’s) level, and they have 100,000 people in each district, it’s hard to do the job right.”

And it’s none of the county’s business anyway, said County Councilman Wayne Fontana, D-Brookline. Calling the proposal purely political, Fontana said, “Let the oversight board and Act 47 do their thing.”

Right now, restructuring city government is “on our agenda, but its not the first priority,” said oversight board chairman Bill Lieberman, an insurance broker.

Another board member, Duquesne University chancellor John Murray, was on a committee six years ago that recommended the county have a part-time “citizen legislator” system when it switched to a home rule form of government.

It works well for the county, but that doesn’t mean part-time legislators could run the city, Murray said.

“There is nothing on the immediate agenda,” Murray said. But, at least in the hypothetical, “it should be considered.”

Additional Information:

County Council

Members: 15

2004 budget: $950,600

Pay: $9,000

City Council

Members: 9

2004 budget: $2,212,375, including $1,504,173 for council and $708,202 for the clerk’s office

Pay: $53,687

Categories: News
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.