What Fresh Hell Is This?

October 30, 2007

Motznik Chastises the Post-Gazette

Pittsburgh City Councilman Jim Motznik railed against the Post-Gazette's endorsement of Republican Mark DeSantis during today's City Council meeting.

He bemoaned what he said was a less than factual endorsement. His complaint centered on this one sentence in the P-G:

Instead of privatizing a service like trash collection, he extends it to Wilkinsburg -- not because it saves Pittsburgh money but because it's created a few more city jobs while helping a municipal neighbor.
Motznik said the move actually saved the city $815,000.00 a year and that it also took 30 garbage trucks off the streets (Council President Doug Shields chimed in saying it actually saved the city over a million a year).

He also said the following:

"...it doesn't matter to me who they endorse for mayor." (Yeah, right)

"I'm frustrated at the crap that a newspaper I used to think was credible would print." (You mean when they printed your bogus claim that Ravenstahl created the 311 line?)

"Don't they have a board of directors that reviews their stories to make sure they are accurate?" (Uh, Jimmy, that wouldn't be the job of a board of directors.)

"Why isn't the editor reading this stuff?" (Uh, Jimmy, it's the editors who WRITE the editorials.)

"Why isn't the editorial board reading it?" (See above.)

"I'm not here to tell you to vote for Luke Ravenstahl." (Well, yeah, you kind of are.)
He also compared the Post-Gazette to AM talk radio and said that the people of Pittsburgh weren't as dumb as the media thinks they are.

In case you're reading this, Councilman Motznik, I don't automatically assume that privatization is a good thing and even if you're correct on any monies saved (and I don't know that you are), you're only addressing one line in the P-G's endorsement.

You can take your yellow boots off again because, as you say, the people of Pittsburgh aren't as dumb as someone may think we are.


The Bag of Health and Politics said...

Got to love Motznik. He's a character. Technically, it's the job of the editorial board to read the stories and ensure accuracy.

Sherry said...

i just chuckled at this from him.

he'd have been much better off not to say anything, no matter what he truly thought.

Bram Reichbaum said...

That quote that you run ... it does not say Ravenstahl failed to save money ... it said he did not DO IT BECAUSE it saved money, but because it added city jobs.

There are scores of mergers and consolidations that would save Pittsburghers money like this, but most of them, instead of adding city jobs, subtracts them (or turns them over to the county). And he's not interested in that, even though the long-term savings would be exponential.

That's what he means by "low-hanging fruit."

Anonymous said...

Both Motznik and Shields are wrong. The decision NOT to privatize was made by O'Connor, just before he was hospitalized, when the Teamsters contract was settled. The $800,000 figure comes from the Teamsters claim that it was $800,000 cheaper for the city to manage trash removal in-house instead of farming the work out to private interests. The decision to expand trash removal services to Wilkinsburg was spawned post-O'Connor hospitalization and out of Teamster president Joe Rossi's relationship with the newly promoted Dennis Regan and their desire to expand the Teamster power base. The silly Wilkinsburg project doesn't save Pgh. a dime. When Motznik and Shields talk about reduction in the number of trucks, they should be crediting Act 47 and the pre-Luke, O'Connor management team who tightened the trash removal program.

Motznik and Shields certainly didn't know what was going on "then", and by their comments, they still haven't figured much out.

Maria said...

Thank you for the explanation. I certainly give more credence to anonymous here then Motznik.

Anonymous said...

Jim Motznik needs to be kicked in his "low hanging fruit." I was appalled when I saw his statement this evening on the City Channel. I realize that this was the open comment period but I vehemently disagree with the notion that this time --and OUR city "network"-- can be co-opted for such a patently obvious political commercial, particularly down the homestretch of an election. It is bad enough that we're inundated with "constituent services" mailers funded by our tax dollars, must we also suffer the indignity of a purely political response/infomercial/endorsement from this ass rocket? Better idea: roll the tape on Motznik running from the Channel 4 News cameras over his use of city vehicles.

Anonymous said...

John K. says: At least Motznik is honest. Two years from now the Post-Gazette and all the folks in here will be bad mouthing DeSantis and praising some Democrat, probably Peduto. And of course, when reminded of all the good things you left wing hypocrites said about DeSantis you will, as a matter of modus operandi, deny you said it and call the person who quotes you a liar. So Motznik is at least honest, which is way more than the left wing kooks in here.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous at 8:15: Do not praise these people by referring to them as "left-wing" kooks. They are definitely kooks, but they're not left-wing.

Maria said...

Lukey is a huge DINO.

The Bag of Health and Politics said...

Luke would be a Republican were he my neighbor in Hagerstown...

Anonymous said...

John K. says: Remember left wing kooks, and Motznik is right on this. You compare Ravenstahl to Bush. Ravenstahl compares DeSantis to Bush. And two years from now you will be comparing DeSantis to Bush. Hypocrites galore on this left wing blog.