Thursday, October 11, 2007

Best Moments of the Night (pt 3)

Mayor Ravenstahl was asked about public safety, and he asked, "Can I have more than a minute?"

First we thought it was a rude request -- but then recognized it as plain eager confidence. He had a lot to say on the subject.

He boasted of putting a hundred more cops on the force, reopening West End station, assigning more beat cops and perhaps installing police cameras. (P-G, Timothy McNulty)

Challenger Mark DeSantis shot back that the staffing level of the police department was set by the Act 47 recovery plan. "It is not an initiative," he said sharply, "it's a requirement."

This caused Ravenstahl to make a huge WTF-style face.

DeSantis went on to tout features of his own public safety plan -- putting more cops on the streets instead of administrative positions, and putting many more of them through Community Oriented Policing training.

The point is, both candidates were really strong on public safety, and confident. They should hold a whole debate exclusively on crime and public safety. It would be a win-win-win.


Ravenstahl was also strong on the blight and nuisance property question.

We continue to not be impressed by his celebrated Ten Neighborhood Forums -- he is holding them what, about once a month? -- but we remember him speaking very knowledgeably on how to combat blight, and new nuisance property legislation.

After his answer, he looked all excited like he expected some applause. We would have applauded maybe, but we weren't about to start a round of Lukeplause. If some Lukeplause broke out at that moment, we would have joined in.


When the P-G board asked a "yes or no" question -- would you hire or promote anyone in the police department with abuse allegations in their history -- Ravenstahl answered no.


So he will not hire or promote anyone with even a domestic allegation in their history. Even if we don't know for sure whether the guy was getting attacked with a frying pan. Does Jim Malloy know about this?


DeSantis said he'd veto the parking tax legislation coming out of council, because it is illegal and will endanger state monies. Ravenstahl said he's still going to ask the state legislature to change things, but indicated specifically that he "agrees with Mark" on this. That was a pleasant surprise.


When casino development emerged, everybody took aim at Harrisburg. The Libertarian kid came out in favor of the Isle of Capri plan for the Hill District.

This was odd -- it was the second big community forum we attended this week at which people said "everybody" wanted a casino on the Hill. The other one was the North Side Leadership Conference meeting.

At any rate, Mayor Ravenstahl got into the thicket of community issues.

"NSLC has negotiated a fair deal," he said, and on the other hand, "Other organizations have come forward with legitimate issues."

This tacit approval of Pittsburgh / Northside United efforts was notable and a little surprising. However, he went way too far claiming that whatever meetings and discussions he has held or is holding are somehow "above and beyond."

We're not sure what would qualify as an "above and beyond" meeting, but his impact thus far has been "distant and marginal."


  1. The KID - as your post said - is the second oldest in the race.

    Furthermore, the groundwork of the IOC (Isle Of Capri) statement was to say that the city leaders (Luke) said NOTHING. The city was passive. The city was in a bend over and take it mode. The city just begs. The city that begs can't be picky.

    Furthermore, the win-win-win discussion is great. Bring on more debates. I've asked for them for months. They won't materialize now. Too little, too late. But, if you have a debate about public saftey -- the one with real experience is the Libertarian, the paratrooper, Tony Oliva.

    The veteran isn't a "kid." He's got the mileage to prove it.

  2. Sound like Ravenstahl did well.

    It sounds like DeSantis is not doing enough to switch voters to go to his side. At every chance DeSantis has to jump on things and come out on top to even have a chance in this race.

  3. Bram, another of your astute observations: "So he will not hire or promote anyone with even a domestic allegation in their history. Even if we don't know for sure whether the guy was getting attacked with a frying pan. Does Jim Malloy know about this?"

    Absolutely right. That question does not allow for a simple "yes" or "no" answer -- unless the person responding is intending to lie to women's groups and the rest of us who are concerned about domestic violence. I think the correct answer to that question is: "No, until the allegation is properly investigated and it is determined to be without merit." After all, this is 21st Century Pittsburgh, not Salem, Massachusetts 1692.

    And Rauterkus, I saw you at the debate -- why the hell weren't you up on the dais?

  4. Mark, we have called Luke a kid on occasion. Give the kid a chance? So yes, we are fine with calling Tony Oliva on occasion.

    Peckham's right. Why the hell weren't you up on the dais?


    I'm not a candidate for mayor. I'm a candidate for city controller. And, I'm a candidate for city council (district 3).

    The link to the photo above shows TONY OLIVA, my 'kid' -- (giggle), Libertarian. I helped get Tony on the ballot. Tony is a new young leader. We aim to empower.

    The edge of Tony's ear was in the photo showed in the Trib. Didn't you see it???

    We need a soldier to handle the frustration for a while. Once you see us in camo -- look out. :)

    We barked and PUMP is going to give Tony a 3-minute opening (and perhaps) closing statement at tonight's debate too. And, we (Ls) got a table too! That is progress. PUMP has closed the door on my face in the past.

    Plus, we need to have you all demand debates for city controller's race. And debates for city council races (district 1, 3, 9).

    ZERO debates is those important races is NOT right.

  6. Mark, I join you a demand for a Controller's race.

    What say you, Mr. Prothonatary?

  7. Bram, who said they wanted the casino on the Hill at the NSLC meeting? When? It must have been before I arrived.

    Second, why on Earth do they feel comfortable saying such silly things? It seemed as though it was much more clear that, no matter what, the Northside was the best pick. Why do these folks think it's okay to put a casino in anyone's residential community? It's just ignorant.

  8. I don't know who it was -- but it was definitely said. And possibly assented to by Ferguson & Fatla. I think it was during the early going, before Dan and Luke arrived.

    It was triply odd because, you know, everyone wanted and expected the casino to go in STATION SQUARE...