The Pittsburgh Citizen

What's the story behind Pittsburgh's revitalization? Today's topic: What do Pittsburgh politicians and politics have to do with it? In general, what role has local government played?

It's a timely topic in part because of this recent post at Pop City: "Five Things that Allowed Pittsburgh to Turn the Corner." John Denny, who does PR for investment firm the Hillman Company, identifies the following five: RAD (the Regional Asset District that collects and distributes taxes to fund certain cultural services in the region); home rule for Allegheny County; the Life Sciences and Digital Greenhouses; river and trail restoration and access; and creation of the County's Department of Human Services.

I think that this is a good list in its focus on institutions rather than on individual people - or on "grit," but it is a decidedly "old school Pittsburgh" list in its focus on government and top-down organization as drivers of change in Pittsburgh. That's no surprise. The Hillman Company and the Hillman name are two of the most respected institutions in the entire region and icons of the Pittsburgh establishment.

So, while there is no doubt that each of the items on that list has played an important role in Pittsburgh over the last 10 years, it's also true that the story in each case is full of misses as well as hits. The current recession has exposed the flaw in the RAD formula, as recipients of RAD funds fight over a smaller pool of funds. Home rule gave us a strong county executive, but in practice that office is susceptible to exactly the same kind of local politics soap opera that characterizes the Mayor's Office and City Council. I will talk about the Greenhouses in a later post in this series, on Pittsburgh's tech economy, but a case could (and will) be made that the Greenhouses have stood in the way of authentic entrepreneurship, rather than facilitated it. Calling out progress on Pittsburgh's waterfront is a right thing to do, but the job is far from complete and, as the recent mini-flap over trail access at the new casino showed, government sometimes has to be prodded to do the right thing. The County's Department of Health Services, for all of its good work, is not in a position to address deeper structural problems that I once described as "Second World Pittsburgh" and "Third World Pittsburgh." More on that, too, in a later post in this series.

In general, it's just as easy to see Pittsburgh's government -- city and county -- as obstacles to revival as it to see them as facilitators. People outside of the region encounter the Mayor for the first time and are inclined to see him as the embodiment of a young, forward-looking city. It doesn't take much scrutiny to dispel that notion; even many of Luke Ravenstahl's supporters welcome his leadership precisely because it so explicitly echoes the way that Pittsburgh politics has operated for decades, via appeals to traditional urban Democratic constituencies and via backroom deals. But I don't want to bash-and-run; in recent months, it strikes me that the Ravenstahl is very slowly learning how to exercise the levers of power. The recent showdown with the Pennsylvania Legislature over Pittsburgh's underfunded pensions is one example; facing down County Executive Dan Onorato over the cost of security for the G20 summit is another.

Read more at Pittsblog.

[Part I is here] [Part II is here] [Part III is here] [Part IV is here]