ShareThis Page
Pittsburgh council delays vote on take-home vehicles |

Pittsburgh council delays vote on take-home vehicles

| Wednesday, March 5, 2008 12:00 p.m

Pittsburgh City Council today delayed voting on legislation to restrict use of city-owned vehicles that employees are permitted to take home.

There are 58 take-home Explorers, Impalas, Yukons and other vehicles, but Councilman Ricky Burgess’ bill seeks to reduce that number to seven for key positions. Exceptions could be made for employees who drive more than 1,200 miles a month.

“I introduced this bill because we should not supplement city employees for their commuter costs,” Burgess said. “I think that we need to have a policy where vehicles are taken home only when those take-home vehicles are used for emergency situations, like first responders when people are going to go directly from home to a scene (of an emergency).”

Council members including Jim Motznik, Bruce Kraus and Council President Doug Shields expressed support for the legislation.

“No only is it practical, but it’s symbolic to the state that this council is acting prudently,” said Shields, referring to Pittsburgh’s financially distressed status.

Council voted unanimously to delay a preliminary vote on the legislation and first hold a televised public meeting on the merits of the vehicle restrictions. A date for that discussion hasn’t been set.

Burgess believes only seven city jobs warrant a take-home vehicle — mayor; public-safety director; public works director; and the fire, police, Emergency Medical Services and Bureau of Building Inspection chiefs.

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.