Last night I was lucky enough to get a few minutes with City Council President, Doug Shields.The newness of the new council was evident as I walked down the hall to Shields' office. Both Bruce Kraus' door and Patrick Dowd's door were yet to have their names painted on them. Only a printed paper sign on each to know who sat where.
Shields and I sat in his outer office, its desks and chairs an odd mixture of furniture left-overs. One wall still decorated with Christmas cards, the table behind us partly covered with a few boxes of Christmas-gift chocolate. The water cooler sat empty in the corner. It was late in the day.
Say what you will about the Council President but he's a very gregarious guy. During my first interview with him, he gave me a lesson in mayoral/electoral politics. This time it was the intricacies of membership in the Pittsburgh city council.
I started with the recent vote electing Shields president of the city council, asking him to take me through the process of what happened. He very gently declined to answer the question - though his gentle explanation took some time. It's a political process, he said, pure and simple. One that's internal to the council itself and it wouldn't serve the public good to do a post-mortem on the process after the fact.
The important thing to do, he said is to take time to heal.
He went on to say that each council member was under pressure-quickly adding that he wasn't talking about any sort of political-deal type pressure. It was the recognition that the votes each member casts have real life consequences. He said that the city council is a very tough political school. There are no back benchers, no party leadership to protect new members in vulnerable districts. The votes here have to be done in a deliberative, confident way because there's no where to hide.
This got him to his theme of the evening: that there's a difference between theory and reality.
He's looking, also, to educate all the members of council (and their staffs) about the workings of local government. An idea might be great, he said, but without a good analysis supporting it, it not be the best plan to implement.
I have to admit I was somewhat surprised at his answer to my next set of questions. I asked him what he thought the greatest challenge for the new council would be. He didn't say (as I expected him to) it was the budget. He said it was to "elevate the standing of the council" adding that the "standing is not what it could be." I wasn't sure what that meant, exactly, so I had to ask about it a couple of times. In order to deal effectively with other legislative bodies the city council has to work in good standing - to be taken seriously, I guess. He said it's difficult to approach the State House with an idea for good government only to get a "Yes, but look at your..." in response.
He said that the image of the council was that of a "bunch of pandering know-nothings."
Raising the standing includes solidifying the idea that the city council is a co-equal branch of local government - that it's a valid check and balance to the Mayor's office. The council, he said, doesn't want to be a rubberstamp for the Mayor. Neither does it want to be adverserial. He's looking for a relationshop between the council and the Mayor that's based on mutual cooperation and respect. If everyone respects the rules and protocols then "we'll all end up with a better result."
He said that the council will be able to do this if it makes the people of Pittsburgh the agenda.
4 comments:
IMHO, this is what Doug is digging at:
City council is nearly meaningless, hence; city council = low standing.
City council has been 'marginalized' by its own folly.
City council and the mayor cheered, mostly, when the OVERLORDS arrived in Pittsburgh -- to do the job of council because council took the city to despair. Bad budgets, bad fiscal controls, bad population loss, bad taxes, bad policy, bad blood.
These are global views -- the forrest and not the trees.
Of course city council needs to raise its standing. They need to 'stand tall' as people, as politicians, as a legislative body.
Deeds will matter more than words.
For example, work on cat licenses will keep them stuck in the mud.
Interesting stuff, Dayvoe. I would not have lead with raising Council's standing, but now that I mull it over I can see how it's a concern.
The best way to turn that around is good deeds, IMHO, so here's looking forward to the coming weeks and months.
This is an interesting post because it has the potential to get at the heart of Council’s problem. I think everybody on Council wants to be pedantic (to one degree or another, less so for Darlene Harris, for example) but Doug Shields takes wordiness to its highest level. I have watched a few Council sessions on the City Government channel, and Shields just talks too much, without really saying anything. In fact, the phrase “pandering know-nothings” exemplifies the problem. And I get the impression that other people around the city see Shields as something of a blowhard. Don’t get me wrong, I rarely hear of Shields described as anything but a nice guy, and the negative reports I hear come from commenter’s barely able to put two sentences together. But I have seen and heard Shield’s lengthy Council speeches myself.
The fact that the Council President of a distressed city is more concerned with the appearance of City Council than with the budget is disturbing. The fact that he himself contributes to that appearance and does not acknowledge that is also disturbing. Certainly Council’s relationship with the Mayor has been a problem. Council does need to start asserting itself, even voting on resolutions of reprimand concerning the Mayor’s behavior, as long as it is done in a discrete and defined manner. Shields needs to think less about what he is going to say and focus on other people, guiding debate, setting a respectful role model, and curbing the worst excesses of his fellow council persons.
wordiness? A politician's stock in trade perhaps?
But when Shields gets "wordy?" sh-t happens. Like the bubble zone at Planned Parenthood offices, or the Domestic Violence legislation, Pay equity study. Oh, yeah and put to rest the screwball, madcap UPMC tax credit deal. Knows the budget front to back. Making everyone, state leg. in particular, come clean on the true state of affairs of an unworkable Act 47 plan by invoking a determination of the city's status by Yablonsky. All the while successfully politicking and preseving his position in a very tough President of Council vote. Not too shabby.
Yeah, he talks, and he gets things done. Beats having a guy who doesn't say much and just collects a check.
Post a Comment