Council approves land bank cooperation agreement and accepts North Shore parcels after debate over oversight and tenant protections

Pittsburgh City Council on Sept. 22 approved two related measures to expand the city’s land-bank powers and accept property from the Sports & Exhibition Authority.

Council approved Bill 22-17, a resolution to accept certain parcels from the Sports & Exhibition Authority for $1 plus costs that will be added to North Shore Riverfront Park, by a unanimous 9-0 vote. Later the council approved Bill 22-19 — the intergovernmental cooperation agreement authorizing the Pittsburgh Land Bank to acquire tax-delinquent and other properties — on an 8-1 vote.

The cooperation agreement drew both public praise and caution. Chris Rossello, director of policy at Pittsburgh Community Reinvestment Group, told council, “This agreement may seem routine on its face, but its importance cannot be overstated,” and urged members to approve the measure so the land bank can return vacant and tax-delinquent properties to productive use.

Councilwoman Deborah Gross, who supported the package, said the agreement gives the land bank a “new tool” to address long‑standing vacant-property problems but warned council to watch how the power is used. “We don’t want to see people who are living in their home having their homes taken from them,” she said, urging oversight and safeguards for vulnerable homeowners.

Council debate reflected that balance of hope and caution. Councilman Bobby Wilson, sponsor of the land‑use package, said the agreement will help recycle vacant and abandoned properties into housing and neighborhood reinvestment and thanked the land bank board and staff for months of work. He said the measure also lays groundwork for upcoming legislation to add board seats for the county and the school district.

Not all members were persuaded. One council member voiced objections about shifting powers away from council and the potential for negative uses of the land‑bank authority. That member stated on the record, “I’m gonna vote no today,” and voted against Bill 22‑19; the motion nevertheless passed 8-1.

Council and public speakers raised specific concerns that the city should monitor implementation closely: avoid taking occupied dwellings without adequate tenant protections; ensure transparency and accessible records of property lists and dispositions; and prioritize neighborhoods that have experienced long-term disinvestment.

Council recorded no changes to the cooperation agreement on the floor at final action. Council members said they expect additional implementing documents and subsequent legislation addressing board membership and operational detail to follow.

Ending: Council members said they would monitor land bank activity and consider follow‑up measures. The two votes conclude a multiyear effort to equip the city with a more active mechanism for returning tax‑delinquent and vacant property to productive use.