Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Asset Transfer topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pittsburgh hearing on Bill 22-20 draws calls for guardrails and a community advisory board
Summary
At an Oct. 18 public hearing, residents and advocates urged Pittsburgh City Council to add transparency measures and a community advisory board to Council Bill 22-20, which would transfer leased water infrastructure to the Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority under a July 1995 capital lease for an amount not to exceed $1. Council referred the item to the standing committee for further review.
Pittsburgh City Council convened a public hearing Oct. 18 on Council Bill 22-20, a resolution authorizing the mayor and the director of finance to enter into bills of sale, assignment and indenture with the Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority (doing business as Pittsburgh Water) under the July 1995 capital lease for a total amount not to exceed $1.
Dozens of registered speakers and advocates used the forum to press council for stronger oversight, clearer public engagement and legal guardrails before any transfer proceeds. “I’m calling today representing Upstream Pittsburgh’s environmental justice table as the ethics consultant,” said Pohmay Chakman Yahala, urging protections for infrastructure being transferred and warning that without guardrails future generations could face higher rates and diminished access to clean water.
Community leaders focused on governance and transparency. John Stephen, convener of the Negu Run Watershed Task Force, said the agreement as written “weakens both” governance and public input and urged broader outreach and customer engagement. Javasia Cheney, water equity director at Upstream Pittsburgh, said the spring referendum made clear “our water asset must remain public,” and urged creation of a water advisory council to guarantee accountability and community representation.
Speakers asked council to close what they described as “loopholes” that could enable private firms to manage or influence operations through public‑private partnerships. Gabrielle Gray noted that the referendum prevents sale or lease to a private water company but does not by itself bar public‑private partnerships and asked council to press Pittsburgh Water to establish a community advisory board and improve communications around board appointments.
Councilwoman Gross, who called for the hearing, framed the transfer as a significant public‑asset decision. She said the council was debating “what we think is probably a $2,000,000,000 asset” being transferred to PWSA “for a dollar,” and recounted the authority’s 1995 capital lease and past experience with Veolia, which she said had undermined local control. Gross also referenced a 1995 debt figure of $100,000,000 and a CPI adjustment she described as roughly $200,000,000 in today’s dollars, arguing council must exercise oversight.
No formal vote was taken during the hearing. A councilmember requested that Bill 22-20 be placed on the standing committee agenda for the council’s next meeting to allow additional staff testimony and deliberation. The presiding officer adjourned the hearing after that request.
What’s next: Council members said they expect further discussion at the standing committee meeting scheduled for the following day, where PWSA staff and the city’s director of finance were expected to provide additional details. The public was invited to return for that meeting to present further testimony.
